Slashdot Mirror


Analysis Reveals Almost No Real Women On Ashley Madison

gurps_npc writes: Ashley Madison claimed to have about 31 million men and 5.5 million woman enrolled. Those odds are not good for the men, 6:1. But unfortunately, most of those 'women' were fake. This researcher analyzed the data and found only 12,000 actual, real women using Ashley Madison. That means for every 7750 men, there were 3 women. There are reports that Ashley Madison paid people to create fake female profiles. Their website admits that 'some of the users may be there for "entertainment purposes."' The article itself is well written, including a description of the analysis. A charitable person would say that Ashley Madison was selling a fantasy, not reality. But a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a thief stealing money from lonely, unhappy men.

450 comments

  1. Aha! by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ' Their website admits that 'some of the users may be there for "entertainment purposes."'

    Not to confuse those with the 'professional' cheaters.

    1. Re:Aha! by Flavianoep · · Score: 5, Informative

      I guess that those users were more likely to be professional chatters. Within 10 minutes of signing up to the site, I received one message from another user, but Ashley Madison demanded money from me to read it. I suppose it is how the scam, if there is one, works. I could investigate more, but I forgot my password. I could recover it but... *yawn*

      --
      Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
    2. Re:Aha! by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some?

      On a site like that - the only real women would be women that are either desperate or looking for other women.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect many of the other dating websites are similar. I met my wife thru one. However she had hundreds of men to pick from. I had maybe a few dozen to pick from.

    4. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect many of the other dating websites are similar. I met my wife thru one. However she had hundreds of men to pick from. I had maybe a few dozen to pick from.

      To narrow the playing field, you told her about your 12-inch personality!

    5. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      >However she had hundreds of men to pick from. I had maybe a few dozen to pick from.

      I am sorry the website did not present you with a wider selection of men.

    6. Re:Aha! by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On a site like that - the only real women would be women that are either desperate or looking for other women.

      I had heard that most the women on AM were call girls. Now I doubt that, as I'd think there'd have been a lot more, but still, there's a third category for your list.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    7. Re:Aha! by Z00L00K · · Score: 0, Troll

      If you define callgirls as real women.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    8. Re:Aha! by bsd_usr · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure most online dating sites create fake profile with women that are way too good to be true just to sucker dudes into signing up.

    9. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that those users were more likely to be professional chatters. Within 10 minutes of signing up to the site, I received one message from another user, but Ashley Madison demanded money from me to read it. I suppose it is how the scam, if there is one, works. I could investigate more, but I forgot my password. I could recover it but... *yawn*

      If I recall correctly, classmates.com was part of a class action suit about that same sort of behavior. Classmates would send you emails saying "4 people have viewed your profile" and you had to subscribe to find out who. But it turned out many of the viewers were fake, and merely meant to make you curious enough to subscribe.

    10. Re:Aha! by penguinoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ' Their website admits that 'some of the users may be there for "entertainment purposes."'

      Not to confuse those with the 'professional' cheaters.

      Actually, I'd have more respect for the "professional cheaters". Not only do they get paid, but it is less likely that they're hiding it from their spouse.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    11. Re:Aha! by narcc · · Score: 4, Funny

      If they're fakes, you've either been taken or you'll need to pay extra.

    12. Re:Aha! by freeze128 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There should be a poll of all the men registered on the site, and ask them if any of them were "entertained" by the breach.

    13. Re: Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's true, and to stay out of legal trouble, most now put it in their terms and conditions.

    14. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So were you actually on the site to cheat, or were you just conducting research?

    15. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or most likely, pros

    16. Re:Aha! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Man dating sites had their employees create fake profiles and message new users, to encourage them to pay. Some guy in Germany IIRC sued one of the big sites because he actually ended up going on a few dates with their female staff, which of course went nowhere. He was a big spender on the site, I don't think they go quite that far for most guys.

      Of course there are also loads of prostitutes on there, who you have to pay to message.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    17. Re:Aha! by Stan92057 · · Score: 2

      Only the lawyers and court made out.

      http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/11/how-lawsuit-against-classmates-com-ended-in-paltry-3-93-payouts/

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    18. Re: Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's true, and to stay out of legal trouble, most now put it in their terms and conditions.

      Citation or you are spewing garbage.

    19. Re:Aha! by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The difference between a woman getting ready for a date and a man getting ready for a date is this: the man looks in his mirror and wonders if he'll get lucky; the woman looks in her mirror and doesn't have to wonder.

      'Tis far, far easier for a woman to get a date than a man.

      This has been true for all of human history. It's what makes the world go round. Don't you love it?

    20. Re:Aha! by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

      ' Their website admits that 'some of the users may be there for "entertainment purposes."'

      TRANSLATION: "Approximately 99.995%, of our female users may not actually exist except at profiles on our site."

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    21. Re:Aha! by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "'Tis far, far easier for a woman to get a date than a man."

      True.

      Any woman can get up in the morning and say, "I'm gonna get laid tonight" with 100% accuracy.

      The only men that can say this are rapists.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    22. Re:Aha! by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If I recall correctly, classmates.com was part of a class action suit about that same sort of behavior.

      You recall correctly; this is exactly what they were doing.

      I made up a fake profile on Classmates under the name of "Fuckyou Fakename" and within 24 hours I had notifications that "several" of my old classmates (including some females) had "read my profile" and "wanted to connect". And some of them had snippets of text that was grayed out with only the first few words showing, like "Hi there, remember me? I always..." (grayed out text....)

      The idea, obviously, was to get me to send them money to find out who was interested in me. Total fail, 100%.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    23. Re:Aha! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      Within 10 minutes of signing up to the site, I received one message from another user, but Ashley Madison demanded money from me to read it. I suppose it is how the scam, if there is one, works.

      That is specifically how it works, yeah. I read an article where they interviewed a guy on a team of 28 people working for a dating site creating female profiles to chat with men. So that might have even been a dude who sent the message. The public statements of Ashley Madison claimed a 70/30 ratio, far better than the 86/14 which is actually in the database accounts, and considering that most of those female accounts are fake I would imagine that they can be sued just for those false claims.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    24. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Recovery your password? Why bother! Millions of accounts to choose from...

      Just make up an arbitrary weak password and generate a list of "host" accounts you can body-snatch.

    25. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women frequently describe online dating as follows: "The odds are good but the goods are odd."

    26. Re: Aha! by tlambert · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's true, and to stay out of legal trouble, most now put it in their terms and conditions.

      Citation or you are spewing garbage.

      If he won't, I will (simple Google search, which you could do, if you knew how to work Google):

      https://erosdating.com/terms-o...
      "You also understand and agree that there are users and members on the Site that use and subscribe to our Service for purely entertainment purposes. Those users and subscribers are not seeking physical meetings with anyone they meet on the Service, but consider their communications with users and members to be for their amusement."

      In other words, they find it amusing to troll people, and some of the people who troll people may or may not be employed by the company.

    27. Re:Aha! by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mostly true, but it's not that much more difficult for men. Those women are having sex with someone, after all, and I'm pretty sure it's not all the same guy. Be confident, but not a dick, a good listener, semi-romantic, don't waste time on girls who aren't interested, and you'll get more than enough. Most guys are their own biggest obstacle, particularly those who get hung up on "the one."

    28. Re:Aha! by wiggles · · Score: 2

      Well, *parts* of them are sometimes fake...

    29. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is a small percentage of men that have sex with many women, that is what makes the equation solve for X. They are of course colossal douches and professional sleazeballs, but it does not stop women from sleeping with them.

    30. Re:Aha! by Notabadguy · · Score: 0

      I suspect many of the other dating websites are similar. I met my wife thru one. However she had hundreds of men to pick from. I had maybe a few dozen to pick from.

      Congratulations on your marriage! When are you planning on meeting her in real life?

    31. Re: Aha! by Anil · · Score: 2

      I read in other related articles about people being paid to impersonate interested women on dating sites.

      Given the language in the disclaimer, how would that apply in this case -- if it is an employee or contractor perpetrating a scam, then it is not "purely for entertainment purposes". Not that it would be simple to make that direct connection and bring it to trial, but you would figure the lawyers would come up with broader terms.

    32. Re:Aha! by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      More real than most.

    33. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      'Tis far, far easier for a woman to get a date than a man.

      That's only true statistically - not individually. If you have any kind of standards then you might find that it's slim picking. Then again, this is Ashley Madison - it's not built on integrity.

    34. Re:Aha! by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "I made up a fake profile on Classmates under the name of "Fuckyou Fakename" and within 24 hours I had notifications that "several" of my old classmates (including some females) had "read my profile" and "wanted to connect". And some of them had snippets of text that was grayed out with only the first few words showing, like "Hi there, remember me? I always..." (grayed out text....)"

      Dammit, you missed the chance to meet that Nigerian princess.

    35. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you define callgirls as real women.

      At least more real than many of the non-callgirl women.

    36. Re:Aha! by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a typical "dating" site. While doing web work in LA in the mid 2000's I worked for a guy who had three such sites. He paid a small staff of women (like 3...?) to respond to emails/ads from men. Obviously these women had no interest in meeting anyone, and I was surprised how long he was able to string the men along and keep milking money out of them. After working in this office for a few months I got the idea that most sites worked that way. I used two sites myself that I know aren't like that; Plenty of Fish & Match.com. I met my current gf on POF.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    37. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Most guys are their own biggest obstacle, particularly those who get hung up on "the one."

      No, most guys are the their own biggest obstacle because they are trying to "make it" with someone more attractive than themselves. Bring your expectations down to your own level and getting laid is easy.

    38. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unless of course, you're actually looking for "the one". Then "the other twenty" doesn't really do you any good, does it?

    39. Re: Aha! by tysonedwards · · Score: 2

      Entertainment is a very broad term. It is amusement or enjoyment. Only one party needs to derive said entertainment for the term to be valid, and as multiple parties can be taking part, including potentially operators or administrators of the site laughing about these pitiful guys messaging these fake profiles, the term still remains very much valid.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    40. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only men that can say this are rapists.

      That ignores the fact that some women advertise how easy they are and admit the price of sex in advance. In most places, it is also legal. Thus, any man with a middle-class income can afford to predict his sexual comfort.

    41. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or pay her with the socially accceptable demands of alcohol and/or illegal drugs. Can't name many people I knew who got together without the involvement of at least one of those.

    42. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Anybody who speaks in those terms is trying to play HOPELESSLY out of their own league.

      Repeat after me, nerdy doughboys:

      "I will not get a Kardashian. I will not get a porn star. I will not get a supermodel. I will get an overweight girl with bad skin and a lazy eye, because that's the league I'm in. And sadly, I'll fail to notice that that girl is an absolute peach of a human being, and thoroughly worthy of being loved and spending time with, because I'll be too busy railing against the injustice of the universe to focus any energy on improving myself, or being the sort of guy that even a girl who's in my league would be interested in being with."

      Take your feels to 4chan, where this sort of whining will get you noticed.

    43. Re: Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also eharmony appears to have near zero fakes, and they wouldn't profit much from having them. They've another scam though (auto resubscribe).

    44. Re:Aha! by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Any woman can get up in the morning and say, "I'm gonna get laid tonight" with 100% accuracy.

      Are you implying that 100% of women on the world are so gorgeous and desirable that most men would simply fall at their feet at the prospect of getting laid?

      You have either a very over inflated view of women or a truly sad view of your fellow men.

    45. Re:Aha! by Pfhorrest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've met plenty of women who've bemoaned their ability to get laid.

      Of course, that's because they have standards, and aren't willing to sleep with just anyone.

      A man who's willing to sleep with just anyone, including women he finds from attractive, can get laid with the same frequency as women with those same standards.

      Seriously, go find a lonely ugly fat girl somewhere, don't call her a lonely ugly fat girl, and insinuate that you would like to have sex with her. Pretty sure shot at getting laid.

      That's about what a woman has to do to guarantee she gets laid too. Just drop all standards and be open to fucking anything with a pulse, and bam, boorish contemptible assholes will be all over her, terrible people she hates, but at least she's getting laid right?

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    46. Re:Aha! by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      argh, why don't I use preview

      "bemoaned their inability to get laid"

      "finds far from attractive"

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    47. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Repeat after me, nerdy doughboys:

      "I will not get a Kardashian.

      Good God! I would hope not! That there is a whole lot of crazy wrapped up in one family.

      I will not get a porn star.

      Well, I wouldn't really want one of those either. On the other hand, someone who looks like they could play the part, that I would be interested in.

      I will not get a supermodel.

      Aww, hell! Now you are really hitting me where it hurts!

      I will get an overweight girl with bad skin and a lazy eye, because that's the league I'm in.

      And she will probably have a kid or two in tow that she expects you to provide for. And if you raise even the slightest objection, there is going to be holy hell to pay for your boorishness.

      And sadly, I'll fail to notice that that girl is an absolute peach of a human being, and thoroughly worthy of being loved and spending time with, because I'll be too busy railing against the injustice of the universe to focus any energy on improving myself, or being the sort of guy that even a girl who's in my league would be interested in being with."

      Um, yeah. Real peach of a human being you are describing there. As for focusing my energy on improving myself, I actually do a fair bit of that. It's one of the reasons why I don't bother with the girls with the bad skin, lazy eye, and the kid in tow that I would be expected to take into my home as one of my own. Just sayin'.

    48. Re:Aha! by haruchai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Women definitely have the upper hand here in Western society.

      There are YouTube videos where a good-looking guy asks 100 Americans and 200 European females if they want to have sex with him. I think he may have gotten ZERO in America and 2 in Europe but one was a prostitute.
      As I recall, all of the men with gfs made a point of saying, this is my gf.
      The implication is that some of them may have been willing.
      When a moderately attractive girl tried that, she managed 30 out of 100 but in the early stages was doing MUCH better than only 30%, getting 12 positive responses in the first 26 tries.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    49. Re:Aha! by William+Baric · · Score: 1

      No, seriously, this is rated +5 insightful? I guess, it's really true there are a lot of virgins on slashdot!

    50. Re:Aha! by William+Baric · · Score: 1

      Have you seen what some prostitutes look like? I can tell you that a 45 years old crack addict is not what we can call "gorgeous and desirable". Yet, not only she can find a few clients to have sex with her each night, but she can make them pay for it!

    51. Re:Aha! by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      a good-looking guy asks 100 Americans and 200 European females if they want to have sex with him. I think he may have gotten ZERO in America and 2 in Europe but one was a prostitute.

      Because women are looking for different things in a partner to a man. We want physical beauty, and will happily sleep with someone based purely on appearances, but most women prefer a charming personality over looks (within reason). So this 'experiment' is flawed.
      I've had friends that picked up every single time they went out. I'm talking multiple times per week for years on end. The formula was the gift of the gab, being confident, funny and interesting, and having no standards of physical appearance. Not once did they ever walk up to a girl and ask for sex straight up. The female libido simply doesn't work that way.

    52. Re:Aha! by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

      I know a guy that met one of them. She played the whole married looking for an affair game, said she just wanted to fuck around, and he got hooked.
      So the deal was she'd organise a hotel for their rendezvous if he'd split the bill. He rocks up, she asks for the money, quick shower and sex, and within the hour she asks him to leave. Through sheer chance I heard the exact same story from another guy, same girl, same hotel room. She probably had 10 guys lined up for the day and made a decent income, although you can only pull that off for so long.

    53. Re: Aha! by savuporo · · Score: 1

      where do they siphon pics from though, legally?

      --
      http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
    54. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be confident

      That alone takes years to learn. I'm not even able to fake it yet.

      Meanwhile, a woman just needs to wait until all the better looking women have left. Sure, she may get to choose between drunk bums, but she CAN get laid even if she doesn't WANT to.

    55. Re:Aha! by houghi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is all supply and demand. If a women wants to get an affair, she goes to a pub and she can get laid. Not so much for a man. The ugly fat girl can still be not interested in sex (at that moment).

      And the ugly fat girl can still get laid if she wants to. Not so much for the ugly fat boy.

      Now if you want a relationship, it is almost the other way around.

      Many years ago I knew a person who owned a dating agency. There were so many women and so few man he often pretended to be a potential candidate. This was not for a fling, but for a relationship.

      Women at that time were much more willing to look for a relationship that way. This was all before the Internet.

      It is a bit of a standard that men want to have sex and women want to have a relationship. Yes, there are plenty of exceptions.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    56. Re:Aha! by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Are you implying that 100% of women on the world are so gorgeous and desirable that most men would simply fall at their feet at the prospect of getting laid?

      No, I never implied any such thing, and only a moron would draw that conclusion from what I wrote. You're connecting dots where there aren't even any dots.

      You have either a very over inflated view of women or a truly sad view of your fellow men.

      What I have is 45+ years of dating women on top of thousands of real world experiences that tell me what I wrote is generally correct.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    57. Re:Aha! by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I know a guy that met one of them. She played the whole married looking for an affair game, said she just wanted to fuck around, and he got hooked. So the deal was she'd organise a hotel for their rendezvous if he'd split the bill. He rocks up, she asks for the money, quick shower and sex, and within the hour she asks him to leave. Through sheer chance I heard the exact same story from another guy, same girl, same hotel room. She probably had 10 guys lined up for the day and made a decent income, although you can only pull that off for so long.

      Unless she really enjoyed the whole story telling part, it seems like a lot of effort rather than just advertising as a call girl/escort.

      Using UK prices, a modest hotel room at something like a Holiday Inn Express (thanks google) is about GBP80 so she'd be earning GBP40/hour (say USD60/hour). I'm pretty sure escorts charge more than that.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    58. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Example: my wife (40) and I (35) have been in a rough patch in our marriage (6 y., 2 kids) so I joined a website (Western Europe) advertised as a site for extra-marital affairs. I paid around 100 EUR, messaged women politely, attempted jokes, etc. but never had any proposition to meet, in a span of one and a half year. I later learned during marriage counseling with my wife that she had join THE SAME WEBSITE and got TENS of men talking to her and sending electronic "gifts" and she met with 3 of them and slept with 2 of them, all in a span of less than 6 months.

      This is only one instance but I do not think that it is exceptional.

    59. Re: Aha! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Well, who says they use the pictures legally?

      Otherwise, I would guess various stock photography sites, or even just paying people for pictures. If they paid people to write profiles they could also pay models for pictures. It's already known that Ashley Madison purchases pictures of models for advertising, they might as well do it for profiles also.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    60. Re:Aha! by surd1618 · · Score: 1

      Many, many comments about females on /. are wrong AND sexist, and this one is right, and helpful. I wish I had mod points today.

    61. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you implying that 100% of women on the world are so gorgeous and desirable that most men would simply fall at their feet at the prospect of getting laid? You have either a very over inflated view of women or a truly sad view of your fellow men.

      No, what he is saying, and which is very true, is that for females it is way easier to lower their standards and get laid.

      Average men don't have that advantage. And being a fat nerd myself, I speak from experience.

      Fat chicks get laid, fat nerds don't. It's that simple.

    62. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm in about an hour or so when she comes and picks me up from work. I think she wants to go to the grocery store tonight so we can make a nice meal together.

      Or were you trying to be funny?

    63. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa maybe people don't want to have sex with a rando as bad as this rando thinks they should?

      I don't care how smoking hot someone is, if they come up to you on the street and say "sex please?" you walk away like any normal human.

      Christ, Slashdot is like being back in highschool somedays.

    64. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a fuckton o f "normal humans" would jump at the chance; get over yourself.

    65. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the USA that's pretty much all you have to choose from.
      Apart from the tiny minority that get plastered all over the media, most American women are hippos that are constantly on their backs.

      Gross.

    66. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I say 'Some' is not 'Most'.
      I say most paid date sites are fakes - I can tell by the names and such.
      But I would like to know what the venture capitalists are going to do - they nearly got taken for a much bigger ride.
      With the same logic, the data was not 'stolen' and it now seems the wantabe plaintiff did not have a clean table.

    67. Re:Aha! by tingentleman · · Score: 1

      Mostly true, but it's not that much more difficult for men. Those women are having sex with someone, after all

      No they're not. That's the point. You are assuming that most women want to have sex as much as most men, but not many women wake up and the main thing on their mind is how are they going to get laid today. They mostly _could_; but unlike men it's not such a massive deal. Women love sex, certainly - but they don't have the driving need to think about it continuously, and don't want to just do it recreationally without there being some kind of genuine relationship behind it.

      Women on Ashley Madison would be looking for someone to be with romantically, to bring some excitement and romance back into their lives. Men just want a fuck. And you know what - women know this (even though ignorant males continue to fantasise that women have the same sex drive / tendencies as them).

      tl;dr - Men cannot just "go and get laid" and anyone who claims they can (and think's that OK) is a dick.

    68. Re:Aha! by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      On other hand, you should never be afraid to try for someone you may think is way out of your league. A lot of times you will be turned down, but at some point you may happen upon someone who just digs your personality/sense of humor/whatever. It's happened to me a couple of times, and while it's only a small statistical blip in the number of women I've dated, you should never judge a book by its cover.

      Maybe that perfect 10 is secretly a major geek at heart, or at least appreciates someone who's genuinely a nice person and not just looking to get laid. I'm not saying it happens often, I'm just saying that it's happened to me, so it must happen to other guys as well.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    69. Re:Aha! by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Maybe if you start referring to them as women instead of "females", you would have better luck.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    70. Re:Aha! by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      Hold up, hold up.

      You're saying that these desperate guys needs to get themselves a personality and learn how to talk to people about other things than Pokemans and electronics? Perish the thought!

      --
      Eat the rich.
  2. Really? by Maury+Markowitz · · Score: 5, Funny

    " That means for every 7750 men, there were 3 women"

    So does that mean there were 2583 men for every woman?

    Can someone put this into football fields for me?

    1. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      " That means for every 7750 men, there were 3 women"

      So does that mean there were 2583 men for every woman?

      Can someone put this into football fields for me?

      It means it would've resulted in one hell of a gang bang. Would've been difficult not to make eye contact with another dude during that one, that's for sure ;)

    2. Re:Really? by Tom · · Score: 5, Funny

      Depends on the body mass of these people, which thankfully are included in the sample (well, at least their self-reported body mass, but we have good studies showing the statistical discrepancies, so we can extrapolate).

      If we assume that 4 people can comfortably fuck on a king-size bed, and for simplicity assume such a bed to be 2x2 m then a football field 6400 m^2 (american football) oder 7140 m^2 (european soccer) is the equivalent of 1600-1785 orgies. Let's leave a little space inbetween for walking, etc. then we have 1500 women and 4500 men on such a football field.

      The analysis says 12,000 women, so that's 8 football fields. Since that includes only 36,000 men, the remaining ca. 32 mio. need to fit in the stands, meaning 4 mio. per stadium. The largest stadium in the world is, interestingly, in North Korea and it fits 150,000.

      So, by flawless math and logic, we can deduce that a lot of those male profiles are either fake as well, or gay (which means we need to add a couple stadiums with same-sex orgies).

      There, put it into football fields for you. Happy?

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    3. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple math: 360 feet by 120 feet= 43200 square Feet.
      Divided by 7750 Men= ~5.5 square Feet per man. With crowding, twice as many could fit in.
      And every single, well not really Single, one of them looking to score a Touchdown.
      The Odds aren't good...

    4. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American, Canadian or the rest of the world football???

    5. Re:Really? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 5, Funny

      It means there's 3582 football fields for every 8 library of congress.

    6. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It means that, if men on Ashley Madison sold out AT&T Stadium to watch a football game (about 105,000 men), there wouldn't be enough women on Ashley Madison to field a football team (about 41 women, when an NFL roster has 46 players that dress.)

    7. Re:Really? by hawguy · · Score: 1

      " That means for every 7750 men, there were 3 women"

      So does that mean there were 2583 men for every woman?

      Can someone put this into football fields for me?

      Be happy to. Imagine that a woman is a regulation sized 11" long football. And imagine that a men are 100 yard long football fields. There would be one football for every 8 football fields. That football is going to have an awfully rough time trying to service all of those football fields.

    8. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said football, not handegg. :)

    9. Re:Really? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      No he said football, not girls football aka soccer.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    10. Re:Really? by _UnderTow_ · · Score: 4, Funny

      If we assume that 4 people can comfortably fuck on a king-size bed

      I think you and I have different definitions of 'comfortably'

    11. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      re: "Can someone put this into football fields for me?"

      I think the unit for this would be Libraries of Sexual Congress.

    12. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He said football, not handegg. :)

      what the fuck did you do to your chickens to make their eggs so pointy?

    13. Re:Really? by zarmanto · · Score: 1

      ... So does that mean there were 2583 men for every woman? ...

      So yeah, 2583:1 -- or some other ways to put it*...
      - approximately 0.22% of the "female" accounts were real, (0.03% of the total user base) or
      - roughly the same odds as winning $100 in the lottery, on a $5 ticket.

      I've occasionally wondered how on earth sites such as these could possibly attract enough females to genuinely support any kind of a userbase, without hiring prostitutes or the like... I guess now we know the answer: They can't.

      * That is, not involving football fields, as that's already been nicely covered by Tom.

    14. Re:Really? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Can someone put this into football fields for me?

      Is that American or European football fields? Doesn't matter, this is /. -- It's cars for analogies and Libraries of Congress for units. Get with the program.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    15. Re:Really? by Paco103 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's okay, when it's in a 3 way.
      With a honey in the middle there's some leeway.

    16. Re:Really? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      > That means for every 7750 men, there were 3 women.

      Those odds are still far better than the male-to-female ratio of the average Slashdotter's bedroom!

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    17. Re:Really? by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      The more likely scenario is those football fields find themselves wondering where the footballs are.

      The football doesn't need to give a crap about the football fields in this scenario.

      The footballs fields are just a metaphor (for a metaphor) for a sausage fest where most of the guys are wondering what they're spending that money on.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    18. Re:Really? by trabby · · Score: 5, Funny

      2583 way is less of a leeway and more of a honey surrounded by a freeway...

    19. Re:Really? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There are 22 players, a referee and usually four linesmen on a football field. So there are about 646 football fields per women, unless it's women's football.

      Oh, did you mean American football? I have no idea.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    20. Re:Really? by BadPirate · · Score: 1

      31 Million men -> 22 Men per Football Field = 1.4 Million Football Fields : 12,000 Women = 117 Football fields per Actual Woman

      --
      - Holy crap, I've got MOD points! Who thought that was a good idea.
    21. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine that the women are cars, and the men are mechanics. If we expect a useful lifespan of 10 years for the car it would need to be serviced every day and a half in order to use all of the mechanics.

    22. Re:Really? by meeotch · · Score: 2

      If the ratio is anything even close to what the article suggests, I imagine the one woman involved would be particularly uncomfortable.

    23. Re:Really? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      So you're saying there's a chance...

    24. Re:Really? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I'm way too homophobic for that. That shit just creeps me out thinking about it. No.

    25. Re:Really? by Punto · · Score: 1

      I don't know about football fields but it's about 1.8 Libraries of Congress.

      --

      --
      Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!

    26. Re:Really? by mwehle · · Score: 1

      " That means for every 7750 men, there were 3 women"

      So does that mean there were 2583 men for every woman?

      Can someone put this into football fields for me?

      I don't follow football. Can you give a car analogy?

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    27. Re:Really? by mwehle · · Score: 1

      > That means for every 7750 men, there were 3 women.

      Those odds are still far better than the male-to-female ratio of the average Slashdotter's bedroom!

      Doesn't that depend on the time of day? When Mom comes down to the basement to dust the ratio is 1:1, right?

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    28. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, it's about a full pro stadium's worth of men for a football team of women.

    29. Re:Really? by Snufu · · Score: 1

      I believe the 2583 men number. But the one woman? TOGTFO.

    30. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what the one where they actually use their feet rather than Rugby for cowards?

    31. Re:Really? by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about football fields, but I believe they all could fit in the library of congress.

    32. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, so he meant American football, AKA girls' rugby.

  3. So then the question becomes by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Was Ashley Madison first and foremost a gay hookup site for married men? Or were vanishingly few guys every getting laid through the site? Or were those few women (literally) staggeringly busy?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I imagine a large number of the active women were "professionals".

    2. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me get my calipers and check...

    3. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      None of the above. It was a blackmail acquisition system.

      There is also the possibility that the public list had a nontrivial portion of the female userbase wiped, I think I heard somewhere that it was swiped and made public by a disgruntled female employee of the place. Even if the list was washed, I still think the whole thing was a blackmail acquisition scam.

    4. Re:So then the question becomes by mark-t · · Score: 2

      That said, I'm wondering how AM even made any money.... didn't they offer something like a money-back guarantee or something if people didn't have an affair within some fixed period of signup, like maybe a month or two? Or did they depend on people becoming indifferent about it, and not trying to get their money back?

    5. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Simply put: you could get your subscription fee back in some circumstances, but you never got refunds on the money you had to spend to message people, to buy virtual gifts, chat sessions etc.

    6. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is also the possibility that the public list had a nontrivial portion of the female userbase wiped, I think I heard somewhere that it was swiped and made public by a disgruntled female employee of the place. Even if the list was washed, I still think the whole thing was a blackmail acquisition scam.

      Hillary Clinton wiped that list as her name was on it, and would soon be revealed by the recovered emails.

    7. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary Clinton .. name was on it, and would soon be revealed by the recovered emails.

      Now that's a mental picture I won't soon forget. Wonder if she responded to Bill's contact request?

    8. Re:So then the question becomes by hawguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Simply put: you could get your subscription fee back in some circumstances, but you never got refunds on the money you had to spend to message people, to buy virtual gifts, chat sessions etc.

      I think this is what keeps most people from applying for a refund:

      https://www.ashleymadison.com/...

      if it is determined that you have complied with the above requirements, we will mail you a REFUND CHECK for the original purchase (plus any applicable taxes) within 6-8 weeks of receiving your application. Please note that your refund check will state that it is from "Ashley Madison."

      Who wants a check from Ashely Madison sent to their home or work?

    9. Re:So then the question becomes by gmack · · Score: 1

      I would guess the later and I'm guessing most of the actual women on the site charge by the hour.

    10. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Set the movie "Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels":

      We start a company, something like giant ass dildos Inc., we tell them that we have the best new rubber to make these out of, take tons of orders. Then we say we lost our rubber supplier, we issue refund checks. Now, how many people are going to go cash those checks from "Giant Ass Dildos Inc."?

    11. Re:So then the question becomes by jandersen · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who wants a check from Ashely Madison sent to their home or work?

      Their employees, presumably.

    12. Re:So then the question becomes by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      More likely they depended on never actually giving any money back, even though they said they would. They seem to be that sort of people.

    13. Re:So then the question becomes by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      That's hilarious.
      I figured that just the secretive nature of the site prevents most people from asking for a refund or suing them if they ignore your request.

    14. Re:So then the question becomes by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tom: Listen to this one then; you open a company called the Arse Tickler's Faggot Fan Club. You take an advert in the back page of some gay mag, advertising the latest in arse-intruding dildos, sell it a bit with, er... I dunno, "does what no other dildo can do until now", latest and greatest in sexual technology. Guaranteed results or money back, all that bollocks. These dills cost twenty-five each; a snip for all the pleasure they are going to give the recipients. They send a cheque to the company name, nothing offensive, er, Bobbie's Bits or something, for twenty-five. You put these in the bank for two weeks and let them clear. Now this is the clever bit. Then you send back the cheques for twenty-five pounds from the real company name, Arse Tickler's Faggot Fan Club, saying sorry, we couldn't get the supply from America, they have sold out. Now you see how many of the people cash those cheques; not a single soul, because who wants his bank manager to know he tickles arses when he is not paying in cheques!

      Bacon: So how long do you have to wait for a return?

      Tom: Probably no more than four weeks.

      Bacon: Well what good is that if we need it in six... no, five days?

      Tom: Well it was still a good idea.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    15. Re:So then the question becomes by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I have the Monty Python Blackmail gameshow skit running through my head.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    16. Re:So then the question becomes by jader3rd · · Score: 1

      Who wants a check from Ashely Madison sent to their home or work?

      Before this hack, I had never heard of Ashely Madison, and I suspect that many people hadn't heard of it either. Especially when the hack was first made public all of the news sites described what Ashely Madison was. So I would be surprised if that was discouragement.

    17. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      given the number of self reported success with screwing on ashley madison (comments here and other places) either ashley madison is doing damage control by posting fake testimonials or someone made an imperfect attempt to purge women from the database. Given the hacking groups posted aims (which target Ashley Madison and cheating husbands) it would not surprise me if the hackers had purged a majority of the female accounts.

    18. Re:So then the question becomes by Sibko · · Score: 1

      I suspect the truth is that whoever did the numbers in the OP article fudged them juuuust a bit.

      For example, I see no references made to controlling for fake MALE profiles. Apparently only the female ones can be fake? It almost feels like the point of the article was to say, "Hey look! Men are such cheaters and women hardly cheat at all!"

      And if you told me something like this 5 years ago, I'd have scoffed at it, but with identity politics, online hugboxes, a whole slew of rhetoric and half truths about women in anything, and rampant clickbait articles across the web, quite frankly I don't trust any of the "research" cited by these rags anymore. Not until I can actually look at their numbers and methodology myself.

    19. Re:So then the question becomes by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Hahaha yeah beat me to it, what a legendary movie. Still though on a more sober note what does this mean? Are women less likely to cheat or do they simply have more readily available partners at hand? I mean I can order my groceries online but there's a supermarket two minutes away so I never bother.

    20. Re:So then the question becomes by MattGWU · · Score: 1

      That's the sort of underhanded genius that you need to succeed in business.

      Mail a check? That's entirely unnecessary. They are 100% doing that so people will be discouraged from asking for a refund. Somebody over there is very pleased with themselves for coming up with that.

      --
      "These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
    21. Re:So then the question becomes by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Who wants a check from Ashely Madison sent to their home or work?

      Before this hack, I had never heard of Ashely Madison, and I suspect that many people hadn't heard of it either. Especially when the hack was first made public all of the news sites described what Ashely Madison was. So I would be surprised if that was discouragement.

      If your spouse received a $200+ check from Ashley Madison, wouldn't you be a little curious about where it came from? Especially when you likely are already having marital problems since he posted a profile there. It's not like it'd be hard to research.

    22. Re:So then the question becomes by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      More readily available partners. Dating is a woman's game for the most part these days.

    23. Re:So then the question becomes by fredgiblet · · Score: 2

      IIRC they applied the same tests to male profiles.

    24. Re:So then the question becomes by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      I think you and your friends are in the minority.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    25. Re:So then the question becomes by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Even without that, it's a good scam. You ask people for money to guarantee something that will happen to some of them anyway. Imagine that the odds are 5%. You get 100 people to pay you the $250. 5 of them are lucky, so you keep $1,250. You refund the other $23,750 (after earning interest on it for a year, say $475 at a conservative 2% interest rate). Now you've made $1,725, for doing precisely nothing.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    26. Re:So then the question becomes by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Combination of several things, probably. One can crawl the AM data for patterns for people who do cheat (or are interested in cheating) via a website, but no such database exists for those who do so without use of a site like AM. So, we can only speculate.

      My completely wild speculation is that this method does not appeal to women.

      A man who wants to have an affair just wants someone fuck, and goes looking for it. A woman who is unhappy does not think "I'm going to have an affair!" and starts shopping around. She gets interested in a specific guy and decides to sleep with him. The man goes to the bar to find a woman to fuck. The woman goes to the bar for a good time, sees somebody she'd like to fuck, and does it. The premeditation required to use a website like AM is a more masculine trait.

      A man cheating on his wife has to take more risks. Back to the bar, the guy is more likely to have to strike up conversations with many women before he can find one who's interested. Every attempt is a risk. Learning he's married, she might expose him. He's seen talking to her, and one of her friends might expose him. "Hell hath no fury" and all that. I think a woman is more likely to inform another woman that her husband is fucking around than a man is likely to inform another man that his wife is unfaithful. And I don't think it's a secret that it's a lot easier for a woman to walk up to a guy she doesn't know and say "wanna fuck" and succeed, than it is for a man to walk up to a woman and do the same thing. So the whole discretion thing of AM is a much more enticing lure for a man than it is a woman.

      And finally...women in general are not as interested in technological solutions to problems as men are. And remember AM has been operating since 2001. So think about the changing demographic of those who are "tech savvy" across that entire time period. When someone thinks "I want to have an affair," I think it's far more likely the person who thinks "I know, I'll go look on the internet!" is going to be a man than a woman.

      So, there's a bunch of wild speculation with extreme generalizations that in no way reflect the opinions of Major League Baseball, or anything else, really.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    27. Re:So then the question becomes by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Tinder: The app that gets the top 10% of men by positive sexual characteristics an unbelievable amount of pussy.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    28. Re:So then the question becomes by phorm · · Score: 1

      Wasn't this a joke in some movie (I'm thinking a Kevin Smith flick but could be another), where essentially the item arrived in discreet packaging but all refund were cheques in big glaring envelopes from "Bob's a**vibrator company" or something like that.

    29. Re:So then the question becomes by Crimey+McBiggles · · Score: 1

      It's the same as any dating service. Most women don't need a website to get laid, and they have no desire to sign up for a service that essentially provides them with a constant stream of dick pics or the text-based equivalent.

      --
      Crimey
    30. Re:So then the question becomes by Idarubicin · · Score: 3, Informative

      I suspect the truth is that whoever did the numbers in the OP article fudged them juuuust a bit.

      For example, I see no references made to controlling for fake MALE profiles. Apparently only the female ones can be fake?

      The analyses shown provided the data for both male and female profiles, which you would know if you had just read the article. The article also explicitly acknowledged that we don't know if the leaked data were manipulated or scrubbed in some way--of course, it's not like we're ever going to be given access to known-genuine data.

      That said, there wasn't an obvious incentive for AM to fake male profiles. Unlike males, females were not charged to use the service. (Presumably because it *is* difficult to recruit women to these sites. It's not like we don't see offline parallels--there's a reason why bars have Ladies' Nights.) AM only made money when men contacted women. AM doesn't make money if real women send messages to fake men. Heck, it would cost them money, since those real women wouldn't be interacting with AM's paying male customers.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    31. Re:So then the question becomes by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt this is limited to Ashley Madison, I would be interested to see the numbers from other sites. Not one of them publishes data like this though. Every woman I know who signs up for a site gets crushed by the number of messages she gets. The raw numbers of an 86/14 ratio are probably fairly in line with other sites, but if a large number of those female profiles aren't even real then it seems like a bunch of horny dudes just hanging out together. Probably not all that unlike Slashdot, actually.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    32. Re:So then the question becomes by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      And who wants to prove that they did not have an affair?

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    33. Re:So then the question becomes by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 1

      Given the general behavior of the company, I'd more likely believe the following scenario:

      Guy signs up for the $250 guarantee.
      AM employee signs onto a female account and messages guy, sets up a meet
      AM employee of course never shows.
      Guy demands a refund after 3 months.
      AM responds "Our logs clearly show that you had a hookup."
      Guy: She never showed up
      AM: We have no proof of that. You may file a lawsuit against us if you wish.
      Guy: Glances at the family portrait, hangs up the phone and pretends it never happened.

      --
      Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
    34. Re:So then the question becomes by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are reasons to fake male profiles. Having lots of male profiles with nice pictures and soothing, non psychopathic text helps with recruiting females and maybe getting them to stick around.

    35. Re:So then the question becomes by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Hope springs eternal. Guys stay on the sight hoping someone eventually bites. AM in return has fake accounts that respond occasionally keeping the hope alive. Eventually the men move on, but their accounts stick around to get included in the stats.

    36. Re:So then the question becomes by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Ashley Madison had already made the mainstream news a bit before the hacking, because of its inherently scandalous nature. I think I first read about them on BBC (part of their periodic look into what are crazy Americans doing this week). They never intended to be a secretive dating company and were advertising widely. You don't get 30 million users by keeping a low profile.

    37. Re:So then the question becomes by goodmanj · · Score: 1

      Please note that your refund check will state that it is from "Ashley Madison."

      Genius!

    38. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably, several of those were true.

      There were probably many gay hookups arranged using these site, those women who did participate likely had more suiters than they had time for, and a large portion of the user base probably never got any action via the site.

      Also chances are a lot of the women (and men) were probably prostitutes, using it as a booking system.

    39. Re:So then the question becomes by operagost · · Score: 1

      Wiped? What, like with a cloth or something?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    40. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Now you've made $1,725

      Asking people for money isn't free.

    41. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only a dolt like you finds that stupidity amusing you undereducated hiding behind fake names online loser.

    42. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, she doesn't like getting caught in the rain.

    43. Re:So then the question becomes by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      Yep. Read an article on a Gawker subsidiary about the dating scene in New York, how it's dominated by guys using Tinder to get one night stands. They interviewed some women as well, they expressed disappointment with the status quo and it's just like "Well maybe you should stop using an app dedicated to one night stands?"

    44. Re:So then the question becomes by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      "But I want a lasting relationship from the app that requires users to make snap judgements of people based solely on appearance!"

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    45. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AC didn't make his payment before his boyfriend saw the show. The butthurt runs deep.

    46. Re:So then the question becomes by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What if you run the numbers and find fake females are cheaper than real ones? Not like they care one way or the other.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    47. Re:So then the question becomes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's absolutely true. Here's how it worked: a "professional" woman would sign up to AM, then arrange to meet with several of the men who contacted her. She would then rent a motel room for a day, and see each man perhaps for just 1-2 hours, and then ask that he leaves straight away due to a variety of made-up excuses, like she has to go home to make dinner, pick up the kids, go to an appointment, etc.

      Her only request would be that each man reimburse her for the cost of the motel room, in cash of course.
      So if she sees 6 men in a day, she makes $(room cost * 5).

      And each man believes he is having a quick fling with a hot, unhappy housewife. Everyone is happy!

           

    48. Re:So then the question becomes by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      when women cheat they don't usually start out looking to cheat, they start out becoming more than friends with someone they were close with.

      when men cheat "i don't want to fuck my wife today, i want to fuck a 19 year old"

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    49. Re:So then the question becomes by Idarubicin · · Score: 1

      There are reasons to fake male profiles. Having lots of male profiles with nice pictures and soothing, non psychopathic text helps with recruiting females and maybe getting them to stick around.

      Sure, that's a hypothetical possibility.

      In practice, though, there's nothing about the evidence at hand to suggest that that has happened. And you haven't presented a particularly persuasive case (or any case) to suggest why the fake male accounts would log in to read and reply to messages, where the female fake accounts would not. On its face, one would tend to expect the opposite behavior--AM would have benefitted directly (financially speaking) from encouraging the men to keep chatting with the fake women.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    50. Re:So then the question becomes by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      "But all my friends are on Tinder!"

    51. Re:So then the question becomes by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      There's no persuasive evidence to indicate that Ashely Madison didn't fake female profiles. There IS evidence they faked profiles. Assuming they were only female seems a bit biased, no?

      Note that your objection about fake profiles not chatting doesn't really hold up. Fake female profiles also don't chat. The idea is to keep presenting pictures and profiles that you like, to keep the hope alive.

    52. Re:So then the question becomes by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Was Ashley Madison first and foremost a gay hookup site for married men?

      Wouldn't you just sign up to a gay hookup site instead?

      It's not like you're going to be in any more trouble if your wife finds out, is it?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    53. Re:So then the question becomes by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Wow, that's about as blatant as Big Doug's Protection Industries writing "ooh, nice place, shame if it got broken" on their business cards.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    54. Re:So then the question becomes by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Tinder: The app that gets the top 10% of men by positive sexual characteristics an unbelievable amount of pussy.

      Does knowing the dialogue to all the Star Wars films by heart count among the top 10% of positive sexual characteristics?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    55. Re:So then the question becomes by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      So, you, ah, busy later?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    56. Re:So then the question becomes by Idarubicin · · Score: 1

      There's no persuasive evidence to indicate that Ashely Madison didn't fake female profiles. There IS evidence they faked profiles. Assuming they were only female seems a bit biased, no?

      Note that your objection about fake profiles not chatting doesn't really hold up. Fake female profiles also don't chat. The idea is to keep presenting pictures and profiles that you like, to keep the hope alive.

      I'm not sure if I'm being particularly unclear, or if you haven't looked at the original article and so are unfamiliar with the context for my remarks.

      One of the flags that the analysis used to estimate relative proportions of "real" to "fake" accounts were a couple of data fields that were maintained in AM's private data but not accessible from the public-facing side of the site. These fields included information on when an account holder last checked his or her messages (if ever), when an account holder last used the AM chat system (if ever), and when an account account holder last replied to a message (if ever).

      The number of male accounts which had carried out at least some of these activities at least once was on the same order as the total number of male accounts. (Of 30 million male accounts, about 20 million had checked their messages.) The number of female accounts which had carried out at least some of these activities was only a minuscule fraction of the total number of female accounts. (Of about 5 million female accounts, a few thousand had checked or sent messages.)

      Do the data we have support the notion that fake females vastly outnumbered real females? Yep. It it possible that there were faked male profiles as well? Sure. Do the data we have support the notion that fake males make up any but a minority of male accounts? Nope.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
  4. No real women on slashdot either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Only transgenders with SJW propaganda

    1. Re:No real women on slashdot either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nothing wrong with sucking a feminine penis here and there.

  5. Total sausage fest! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But then again, everyone knows there's no girls on the internet.

    1. Re:Total sausage fest! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then again, everyone knows there's no girls on the internet.

      There are lots of trannies :)

  6. Every dating site and bar ever in other words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe the Flight of the Conchords made a song about this phenomenon.

  7. Colour me suprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seems like most dating/casual sex sites I've been on

    1. Re:Colour me suprised by JackieBrown · · Score: 4, Interesting

      About 18 months after my wife died, I went on POF and was on it for about 6 months. I didn't want to date anyone from work and am to socially awkward to meet people at bars or clubs.

      There are an amazing number of available woman. It took me a while getting used to how fast people moved on a first date - even on a lunch first date.

      That said, I met a few quality people and am now engaged with someone I met from that site.

    2. Re:Colour me suprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I met my wife on a dating site, and dated many more women before that. Maybe you're just ugly.

    3. Re:Colour me suprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea. Back in my single days I was on any number of sites (including POF).

      Though the male/female ratio is terrible on all of them, I met quite a few women from the various sites: including my wife (on eHarmony).

      Since I have a very common email address: I also suffer from people signing up for sites using my email. I really wish these sites would confirm email addresses.

    4. Re:Colour me suprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also suffer from people signing up for sites using my email. I really wish these sites would confirm email addresses.

      Password reset, change all profile information, change password, change e-mail address = problem solved.

    5. Re:Colour me suprised by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Password reset, change all profile information, change password, change e-mail address = problem solved.

      How often do you want to do that? Because it can get downright tiring...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Colour me suprised by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I'm currently receiving the alarm monitoring notifications for some woman in the northeastern US. Address, name, time, date, and what action (alarm on, alarm off, gone to bed, etc.). The messages are no reply and the alarm company doesn't appear to have any kind of e-mail address I can contact. I checked to see if it was the same person who signed me up for the mailing list for her kids' school, but apparently not.

      People really should be more careful.

    7. Re:Colour me suprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've also had success on POF. I wasn't having much success, at first, met a couple of women, one was a nutcase on disability, the other one was nice and had a good job, but I never heard from her again after that. Then I stepped up my game last month and ended up having 3 dates with 3 different women on the same weekend. One of those turned out really well and we've been hanging out and having some amazing sex for the past few weekends. I have maybe 3 or 4 others I'm talking to on there. Haven't spent a dime on that site, either.

      Then there's AdultFriendFinder, which used to be OK, at least I'd met real women on there before and actually had sex. Tried it again recently, met one woman that I was totally not interested in once I actually saw her. The rest of the 'women' I talked to were phony, they'd agree to meet you, then either make excuses or just stop talking on the day you were to meet them.

    8. Re:Colour me suprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be very, very, VERY careful.

      I thought the same thing at the time.

      I met a woman on AdultFriendFinder, we dated casually for several months and then she said she loved me, and I realized that I really loved her too. So we ended up in a monogamous relationship, after two and a half years I proposed.

      After we had been engaged for 3 months I was lucky enough to have spotted a few behaviors on her part that matched what my first wife did just before she left me for some guy she had been having an affair with for the preceding 4 months.

      From those initial clues I started digging a little bit. Started paying attention to when her cell phone was ringing compared to when she left to go shopping/visit her mom. Then I dug more, and the more I dug the more I found to justify digging deeper. Long story short i found out that the whole thing had been a big lie on her part. She had been cheating pretty much the entire time. Even though she told me to my face that she loved me she was telling her friend that I wasn't "The One" she wanted to be with.

      My final conclusion, based on three years of my own experience was that damn near all the people you will meet on sites like POF and AFF are going to be manipulative, lying, narcissistic and selfish sociopaths.

      I hope your case is the exception. But for your own sake take off the rose colored glasses you view your fiancee through and take a good long look at her behavior, does she get text messages at odd times, does she do "Girls Night" with her friends (and ask you not to come along when you offer to be the DD), does she come home and head straight for the shower?

      Good luck.

    9. Re:Colour me suprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not the only one. I met my wife on eHarmony and we've been together for 5 years now. Several of my friends are also happily married from eHarmony, POF, and match.com (we're all nerdy introverts).

      There are a lot of crazies on there, don't get me wrong, but there's also a lot of quality. If you're "normal" (have a bit of confidence, work at a decent job, don't live with your mom, can carry on at least a limited conversation, can take rejection, and aren't incredibly obese) it's very easy to meet women on the sites. I myself met over 10 women, and "dated" (>2 weeks) 6 women before finding my now wife. I talked to many more than that online but didn't want to meet them (or they didn't want to meet me).

    10. Re:Colour me suprised by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      It took me a while getting used to how fast people moved on a first date - even on a lunch first date.

      Ah yes, the old "shagging in Mickey D's toilets" scenario.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  8. Does any one care? by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 2

    I've been wondering for a long time now about this Ashley Madison issue. After the hacking has gone down does any one really still give a shit about this story?

    --

    Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

    1. Re:Does any one care? by Tom · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, because this data set gives us interesting insights into so many topics. From figuring out what your chances of actually meeting a woman on such sites, to demographical analysis (how does the data set in the AM database vary from the average demographics? How can we explain the difference? Self-reporting bias (i.e. presenting yourself better than you are), of course, but maybe there is more?

      Blackmailing these people really is just skiming the surface for easy-to-catch fish. If you dig deep into such a dataset, who knows what you can find?

      Are their profile texts included? I'm sure you can do so many interesting linguistical analysis if you have both the texts and the demographic data. I know this has been done in the past on other dating sites for research projects, but here you have an even more specific set. We can measure deception in written language - do these profiles show above-average signs of deception, or are these people who deceive their spouses honest to their potential online partners?

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    2. Re:Does any one care? by Virtucon · · Score: 2

      Only about the fact that there are reports of extortion and suicides now linked to the hack including a police captain.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    3. Re:Does any one care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and why has this become such a big deal compared to when adultfriendfinder.com was hacked?

    4. Re:Does any one care? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      It's a security hit on wealthy men in rich countries.

      so it gets more notice

      it's not like just another gun murder in a poor ghetto, which is actually shocking and a shame about our era that we consider that normal

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    5. Re:Does any one care? by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I'm actually in the process of doing the exact thing this author did. I do not, in any way, care about the personal identities of the users. But that data all loaded up in MySQL, with R churning away...not everybody's idea of fun, but, well, I am a nerd.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    6. Re:Does any one care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because Ashley Madison was advertised specifically for cheating and not just general screwing around.

    7. Re:Does any one care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I think the summary is that people are stupid and will continue to be fleeced by corporations every they they live.

    8. Re:Does any one care? by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1

      I've been wondering for a long time now about this Ashley Madison issue. After the hacking has gone down does any one really still give a shit about this story?

      Well, they were trying to go public (IPO). *If* they misled investors about the way their business worked, this might land a few folks in hot water.

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    9. Re:Does any one care? by phorm · · Score: 1

      Also, that how many of these sites (including, or possibly especially the big names) are outright fraudulent. I couldn't care less about the paying members, but the emails on internal business practices certainly sound interesting.

    10. Re:Does any one care? by rhazz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It is surprising that there are not MORE suicides correlated with that list, just based on general suicide statistics.

      - General US suicide rate for men is 19.4 per 100,000 per year. (wiki)
      - If there were 31,000,000 men on AM, let's assume a quarter are in the US, so 7,750,000.
      - Based on the above suicide rate, one could expect 1503 suicides from that group within a year. That is 4.1 suicides per day.

      People have discovered that 3 different people from the group committed suicide since it was dumped. Statistically there should be at least another dozen or two.

      I am not a statistician, feel free to correct my math/assumptions.

    11. Re:Does any one care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although unlikely to ever be enforced, this torrent is legally questionable to download in a similar way that downloading the torrent containing "the Snappening" was one of the largest examples of distribution of illegal pornography since Traci Lord's career.

      My intention isn't to compare apples and oranges(the penalties involved are obviously massively different), but what has prevented me from attempting a similar "Kaggle" style research undertaking is the scenerio where Ashley Madison's failing business pivots in to RIAA territory and begins mass lawsuits in a similar manner.

      Supposing Ashley Madison's user-base/profitability was on the decline, based on what I've learned about that company's practices over the past several weeks: I wouldn't put it past them to pull a stunt like Sony was accused of doing with "The Interview" and manufacturing a "hack attack" in order to entrap researchers such as yourself in to exposing the various University foundations to civil liability.

      BBC's "Black Mirror" forecasts of hacktivist extortion rackets seem to be right on the money ATM. An enterprising copyright attorney could probably go full patent troll and produce a series of contrived "hacks" for no purpose other than defendant-farming at $150,000/per DMCA violation.

    12. Re:Does any one care? by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      I can see that. But, assuming my previous post was truthful and not mere e-peen waving on a tech site they would have to track down the "hacker on steroids known as meta-monkey" as I would never post anything like that under my own name or use company resources, as this person did.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    13. Re:Does any one care? by Tom · · Score: 1

      this torrent is legally questionable to download

      Depends on your jurisdiction.

      In many jurisdictions, data about real-world facts cannot be copyrighted, so the only theoretically copyrightable parts are the texts that users wrote (profile texts and emails), and I would guess that AM is not the coypright holder (thought they could have a clause in the contract saying posting something on the site is a transferal of copyright).

      So they could claim trade secret, but in many jurisdictions once your secret is no longer secret, it is not a trade secret anymore. Basically, the courts refuse to participate in the "let's sue everyone because the whole world knows" scenario.

      Since you don't have a connection to the original hackers, what crime you think they would sue you for?

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    14. Re:Does any one care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Along that line another neat thing that could come of it, maybe I'll even take a shot at it myself. A lot of spam email and fake profiles on various sites use a sort of adlib system to generate messages. It has potential studying the profile descriptions and message contents to create a system that detects the adlib skeleton. Could possibly lead to better spam filters and maybe some browser plugins that help people using such sites filter the stuff out. Sure it's not too hard to filter yourself once you see enough of it but we're not as reliable of thinkers as machines when it comes to this sort of thing; just a moment of fatigue or laziness would render your build in pattern recognition inadequate.

    15. Re:Does any one care? by Milharis · · Score: 1

      Probably because it's hard to link a suicide to a specific cause. And even if it is (eg someone left a message to his spouse), the reason is probably not going to get out often.

      Also, other factors on top of my head that might influence it:
      -not every wife is going to want to check the list, and I guess most people would commit suicide only once they've been discovered.
      -it's not really easy to access the list, I think you have to download it from some torrent. So to be discovered you need a wife who has a doubt and want to have a look, plus have the knowledge to do so.
      -some of the accounts are probably fakes.
      -there's the "easy" excuse of "someone else created an account for me! I think it's that guy at work that hates me". It's probably true for quite a few people too, it's an attractive target for a revenge/prank, just like gay porn websites. I think Obama's email address is in the dump for instance

    16. Re:Does any one care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You. I like you.

    17. Re:Does any one care? by proto · · Score: 1

      During the first week since the data breach I've heard commentators on public radio speculate that the numbers of Ashley Madison (AM) female subscribers had to be 40- 52% ("it takes two to tango", "women are just as bad as men.." etc). I've also heard the rhetoric of how people despise cheaters ("they deserve what they get.." etc) not taking into account that the service didn't use the typical confirmation/verify method for emails. You could have created a fake account with your worst enemy's email address and no one would have known! Leave it to the pros to examine the data so that they can properly inform the public instead of the media feeding the public F*uk-those-cheaters-they-deserve-what-they-get sound bytes and misinformation without the basis of facts to stand on. The only good that may come out of this is the closing of the AM scammy service and what the data on modern male sexuality could tell us.

    18. Re:Does any one care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking of this article:
      http://www.chicagotribune.com/bluesky/originals/ct-ashley-madison-data-bsi-20150819-story.html

      Because RICO is so deliberately broad in scope, I can also see a prosecutor arguing that any user that has uploaded the data to the net has become an accessory to extortion. That's a laymen perspective though as IANAL.

    19. Re:Does any one care? by Tom · · Score: 1

      The primary test for all kinds of organized crime is that there has to be an agreement between the involved parties, an understanding to commit a crime together. That is usually the difficult part to prove.

      A torrent is more like a mob. You can leave or join at any time and nobody else cares much. There's very little organisation. I don't think you could successfully bring an organized crime charge against a mob.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  9. So was this... by dosius · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...something along the lines of "Welcome to the Internet, where the men are men, the women are men, and the children are FBI agents" ?

    --
    What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
    1. Re:So was this... by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 3, Funny

      “In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were real men, women were real women and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri.” Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

    2. Re:So was this... by GlennC · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what it was.

      The sad (but funny) part is that there appears to be a lot of people who are surprised by this. Perhaps we've just been here a while.

      --
      Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
    3. Re:So was this... by clark0r · · Score: 1

      I think you're quoting http://bash.org/?2832 "-Global- [Logon News - Dec 29 2001] Welcome to Evolnet! Where the men are men, the women are men, and the boys are fbi agents. but some of the men are really women. Enjoy!"

    4. Re:So was this... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      All the men on lesbian chat rooms really are gay. There are no women there.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:So was this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The women are strong, the men are beautiful and all the children are above average.

    6. Re:So was this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha, thanks! That'll be my new signature.

  10. That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by scunc · · Score: 1

    7750 men for every 3 women. To anyone surprised by this, let me be the first to say--welcome to the Internet.

    1. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      More women than slashdot, I think I've seen five here over the last 17 years

    2. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by KatchooNJ · · Score: 2

      More women than slashdot, I think I've seen five here over the last 17 years

      Keep in mind that not all women on here are obvious. Most people don't realize I'm a woman, because I don't bring it up often when talking technical stuff online. heh

      --
      "Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
    3. Re: That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by organgtool · · Score: 1

      A woman on Slashdot? And you're presumably also from Dirty Jersey? Giggity!

    4. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm a woma

      Yeah, sure you are. I'm not falling for that again ...

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      made me think of my favorite Mike Meyers poem:

      Woman.
      Wo-man
      Whoa man.

    6. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      actually you've mentioned being female gamer a few times over the years

    7. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      That's how you know for sure he is lying

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by KatchooNJ · · Score: 1

      True... but since you obviously sorted through my posts over the years, you also noticed that most of them don't mention my gender. ;-) I don't make it a total secret... it just usually isn't worth bringing up with tech talk on a forum.

      --
      "Never give up, for that is just the time and place when the tide will change." -Harriet Beecher Stowe ^_^
    9. Re:That's Quite the Gender Ratio ... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      nope, typical male slashdot geek has severe phobia about identifying as female

  11. All the data hasn't been released by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IIRC, the hackers have said that there are still GB's of data that haven't been released and probably won't be. Are the hackers selectively screening out certain accounts, and if so, for what purpose?

    1. Re:All the data hasn't been released by dunkindave · · Score: 4, Interesting

      An article I saw said what wasn't released was mostly a database of pictures and messages exchanged through the site. It said there were two problems with releasing the pictures, the database is very large (compared to the text files that compress fairly well), and 40% of the pictures were dick shots and they didn't want to release those. They could still release the database of messages though. I think they are doing the same things as the Snowden leaks, release parts at a time to keep the interest alive, and slowly drive the spike through AM's heart.

    2. Re: All the data hasn't been released by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not releasing the women's data so that they can try to hook up with them.

    3. Re:All the data hasn't been released by ewhac · · Score: 1

      ...40% of the pictures were dick shots and they didn't want to release those.

      I have a question for the guys out there who do this:

      When has this ever worked?

      How many guys have actually gotten dates as a direct result of posting explicit photos to their dating profile?

    4. Re:All the data hasn't been released by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      slowly drive the spike through AM's heart.

      Are you kidding? There are 1 girl for every 2200 guys or so, between that factoid and the media interest in this, I'd be a months pay they've gotten more subscribers in the last month than in the last year.

      This is doing nothing but good for them, all they need to do is put up a reminder about pre-paid CCs when signing up.
      2200:1 ratio is better than 0:1 ratio that most of these people actually have of meeting a girl that's willing to sleep with a married man.

      If they had a greater than 0 chance without Ashley Madison, they'd never have used AM in the first place.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    5. Re:All the data hasn't been released by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding? ... I'd be[t] a months pay they've gotten more subscribers in the last month than in the last year.

      This is doing nothing but good for them

      I can't figure out if you are trying to be funny, or are just delusional.

    6. Re:All the data hasn't been released by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Before the internet we had to take Polaroids of our junk and leave them under cute girls windshield wipers.

      I didn't actually do this. But it happened.

      I will never understand why the girls didn't swap them like baseball cards.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  12. Keep it on the "down low" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously, infidelity was just another clever beard for the shy and elusive homosexual community. Will there be no end to the list of victims?

  13. Beavis and butthead by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 0

    Beavis: Hey Butthead, they said the Analysis reveals almost no real women on Ashley Madison.

    Butthead: Hehe, hehehe. Anal.

  14. "stealing money from lonely, unhappy men." by umafuckit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Go watch "Love Me" (available on Netflix) about Ukrainian "mail order" brides. Those guys are charging ten bucks per message from the guy to the woman. Ostensibly because of the translation services they off. One of the dudes on there was out $10k on messages to one woman alone.

  15. Fixed it for you. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a thief stealing money from lonely, unhappy men.

    But a realist would say Ashley Madison is just cheating men cheating on their wives.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think you understood the summary. At best, they were attempting to cheat.

    2. Re:Fixed it for you. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But a realist would have to ask uncomfortable questions like why such men were lonely and unhappy in the first place.

      When a woman gets married and has children, her whole life changes. Her husband is no longer the focus of her life, her children are. She loses interest in sex, and doesn't see why she should have to do it any more. If she wants another child, sure, but otherwise not. To her, it's just one more person who wants something from her at the end of a long day at work, and this one she can actually say "no" to. So, she does.

      Meanwhile, the husband, cut completely off from one source of sex he is allowed to have, grows increasingly desperate and unhappy. I don't condone cheating at all - but damn, marriage doesn't mean celibacy. Or, it shouldn't. This is the point at which feminists burst into the conversation shouting "RAPE!" (but they always do that) and that's not my argument at all. A wife *should* love her husband and *want* to have sex with him of her own free will. This isn't happening.

      Nobody supports cheating men, but let's be honest here, men need to have sex in order to keep healthy and sane. A website that promises it to them for only $19.95 per month is going to get customers, plain and simple. Remember: desperate and unhappy. Human beings are capable of some pretty fucked-up actions when they become desperate enough. The fact that this website didn't even have any women to match the men to just makes them even more scumbags than we already knew.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:Fixed it for you. by Rei · · Score: 2, Funny

      When a woman gets married and has children, her whole life changes. Her husband is no longer the focus of her life, her children are. She loses interest in sex, and doesn't see why she should have to do it any more. If she wants another child, sure, but otherwise not. To her, it's just one more person who wants something from her at the end of a long day at work, and this one she can actually say "no" to. So, she does.

      Meanwhile, the husband, cut completely off from one source of sex he is allowed to have, grows increasingly desperate and unhappy.

      Okay, sorry for the tangent, but: how on Earth are people from the year 1958 managing to make posts on Slashdot that show up today? How are they even getting a bloody net connection back then?

      --
      Stale pastry is hollow succor to one who is bereft of ostrich.
    4. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. The odds were over 7,000 men per 3 women. Clearly The men were NOT cheating on their wives.
      The men were trying and FAILING to cheat on their wives. The realist would ask why these men didn't divorce, probably because they were stand up men trying to provide for their children. Stop attacking the victims of the hack.

    5. Re:Fixed it for you. by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Men can divorce their fridged wives for abandonment. The same cause of action a woman has on a man who cuts off the money. Funny that.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry you married poorly.

    7. Re:Fixed it for you. by PvtVoid · · Score: 1

      When a woman gets married and has children, her whole life changes. Her husband is no longer the focus of her life, her children are. She loses interest in sex, and doesn't see why she should have to do it any more. If she wants another child, sure, but otherwise not. To her, it's just one more person who wants something from her at the end of a long day at work, and this one she can actually say "no" to. So, she does.

      Meanwhile, the husband, cut completely off from one source of sex he is allowed to have, grows increasingly desperate and unhappy. I don't condone cheating at all - but damn, marriage doesn't mean celibacy. Or, it shouldn't. This is the point at which feminists burst into the conversation shouting "RAPE!" (but they always do that) and that's not my argument at all. A wife *should* love her husband and *want* to have sex with him of her own free will. This isn't happening.

      I'm very sorry this happened to your friend. He must have come out of the experience with a horribly distorted view of women and a huge problem with misogyny.

    8. Re:Fixed it for you. by ahodgson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And lose your kids, half your assets, and a good chunk of your pay cheque for possible the rest of your life.

      And people wonder why guys don't want to get married.

    9. Re:Fixed it for you. by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      But a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a thief stealing money from lonely, unhappy men.

      But a realist would say Ashley Madison is just cheating men cheating on their wives.

      I think a realist would say that Ashley Madison is just men trying to cheat on their wives but generally failing because there are no women to cheat with.

      The Josh Duggar revelation took me by surprise because my first thought was "He was unfaithful, really? With who - I don't think there were any real women on that site." (Now it sounds like it was unfaithful through other venues. I wonder if he even had a genuine affair through AM. For awhile I wondered if he was just calling the act of signing up alone "unfaithful.")

    10. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many states don't really need any excuse for filing for divorce.

      For example, Colorado allows "breakdown of the marriage" as a valid reason for divorce, and filing for a divorce is considered prima facie evidence for breakdown of the marriage. Tough to contest, although don't expect much in the way of alimony for that (although child support will be granted).

    11. Re:Fixed it for you. by swb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know that I agree with the specific phrasing of the parent poster -- mostly for rhetorical reasons -- but I think he's right, despite the ridiculous criticism of the followup posters.

      I'm 48 years old and 100% of the married men in my peer group (middle class, mostly white males married to mostly white females, all with white collar jobs) complain about their wives lack of interest in sex. ALL of them. I don't think any of the conventional explanations make sense.

      As far as I know from my experience with them in domestic situations, all are good contributors to their kids parenting -- two have wives with more demanding jobs and their husbands probably do MORE parenting than their wives. None have any kind of financial problems. All but one are in excellent physical shape, and the former, while "chunky" looks like he did when he was 25, so he's no more out of shape than he was when he was married.

      Two of them have both told me stories that when they were trying to have children -- even their second -- their wives were extremely interested in sex, and once the second baby came along -- BAM! -- no interest. Like a switch had flipped, and neither has related any significant life change that happened concurrently (major change in job responsibilities, etc).

      My explanation for this is that this is mostly evolutionary biology in action. When women who have given birth hit their 40s, they lose their sex drive. The biology is probably buried in hormonal changes, especially considering that women hit menopause and go infertile.

      In terms of evolution, it makes sense that biologically women would lose interest in sex as their bodies become less able to bear children. Women over 40 have increased risk of pregnancy problems, children with chromosomal problems, etc, all things that could be a threat to her or her other offspring if she were to die in childbirth. Childbearing and childrearing is demanding physically, and the older people get the less physical stamina they have.

      I think as a well-known phenomenon its probably even gotten "worse" because women are less dependent on men and have greater legal recognition. In times past, older, married women probably didn't want sex any more than they do now, but either went along with it because they felt they had to or their husbands just took it because they could (yes, this is gross, and no I would never support the idea of a husband raping his wife).

    12. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What, specifically, about the above post do you find antiquated? The idea that married couples should have sex regularly?

    13. Re:Fixed it for you. by PvtVoid · · Score: 1

      The Josh Duggar revelation took me by surprise because my first thought was "He was unfaithful, really? With who - I don't think there were any real women on that site." (Now it sounds like it was unfaithful through other venues. I wonder if he even had a genuine affair through AM. For awhile I wondered if he was just calling the act of signing up alone "unfaithful.")

      Oh, come on. I'm sure that "Self-righteous Christian reality TV star and admitted child molester seeks married women for discreet encounters (no diseases)" was a total chick-magnet profile.

    14. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "frigid".

    15. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In a "no fault" state you don't need a reason for a divorce. Parent is referencing states where "fault" is a factor in family law cases. These are the states which are most profitable for private detectives because they result in sexual "breath-holding contests" where one party wants the marriage dissolved on favorable terms to themselves so they use rationing or withholding of sex as a means to achieve the desired outcome. The spouses will stubbornly prolong their marriage on increasingly undesirable terms until their desired effect of divorce is achieved.

      In these states, the following quote would be relevant:
      "In the case of sexual relations, constructive abandonment means a spouse leaves the marriage in spirit by refusal to have sexual relations. In sexual desertion, which is considered a fault ground, the party charging it must prove abandonment, generally for one year, during which the spouses may share the same roof (but presumably not the same bed)."

    16. Re:Fixed it for you. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      If you try to divorce your fridged wife you have to answer all sorts of embarrassing questions about how she got in the fridge in the first place.

    17. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, the easy solution is to get your wife to agree to an open marriage where either of you can sleep with others outside your relationship thereby greatly cutting down on sexual dissatisfaction. Try it. It works.

    18. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "And lose your kids, half your assets, and a good chunk of your pay cheque for possible the rest of your life."

      We're talking about someone who is willing to get a divorce because he's not getting enough sex. How about instead, the man handle it like a sane and rational person. You talk to your wife about the lack of sex that is oh so important to you. Explain that it is causing a rift in the relationship, but that you still love each other. Discuss what you both can do to make it work. If it's still too difficult, they have marriage counselors, plenty of which understand the importance of sex in a relationship.

      If you can't have that kind of conversation with your spouse, there are deeper problems than just a lack of sex. In which case, you really do need marriage counseling.

      The solution though is not to secretly go out and find people to have sex with. Otherwise, like you said, why in the hell get married in the first place? I'm sure women would agree.

    19. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Specifically, literally everything he quoted.

    20. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think he finds antiquated the idea that a man can express his actual thoughts on the subject involving women and sex.

    21. Re:Fixed it for you. by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      But a realist would have to ask uncomfortable questions like why such men were lonely and unhappy in the first place.

      So realists are big on blaming the victim?

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    22. Re:Fixed it for you. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You may be overgeneralizing just a touch.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    23. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is pretty much my situation - early 50's, two kids in their 20's and a wife with a physically demanding job (she works with children all day) who is pre-menopausal and not enjoying it one bit. After watching our sex life go from a few times a month to never in about a year, I found myself asking the classic question: "am I better off with or without her". I love my wife, despite the lack of intimacy, and wasn't particularly interested in going through a divorce given what my brother experienced: his wife launched a scorched-earth campaign that dragged out for years. And I didn't want to be hasty - I heard some couples can rebound and recover some of their sex life after menopause fully sets in.

      So I decided to take a wait-and-see approach. Not wanting to keep my urges blocked up inside me (literally - I have a family history of prostate issues), I explained to my wife how I felt and told her we basically had two options before us: she gives me some "privacy" on a regular basis to deal with it (by myself - no affairs - just me and the wonderful selection of inspiring images and videos available on the internet), or I would be looking to exit stage left. At first she balked, but after some thought she decided she was better off keeping me around.

      Call it what you will, but so far it works for us. We'll see what happens a few years from now. I still might find myself implementing plan B.

    24. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were all of them actually married?

    25. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my experience women in their 40s are hornier than women in their 20s. (Most studies tend to back me up.) Maybe these guys should put a little more effort in pleasing their wives if they want to get some.

      PS- The easy solution to their issues is porn. Seriously why have an affair when there is free porn on the internet?

    26. Re:Fixed it for you. by roca · · Score: 2

      I'm mid-40s, my wife's a little older, our two kids are in their teens. No apparent loss of interest in sex from either of us. There was a period of reduced interest, but we got through it.

      Two differences from your story: 1) my wife doesn't work right now (hopefully soon). 2) We're Christians, and regular sex is a commitment (1 Corinthians 7).

    27. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1958? I'm not seeing it. The wife in this scenario has a career and is turning down requests for sex without a second thought. What's jumping out at you?

    28. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand you can find many women with half a dozen children that are very interested in sex but with a new partner. If it's an evolutionary trend, it could be something directed at existing partners - pushing for diversity in partners.

    29. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      see why she should have to do it any more. If she wants another child, sure, but otherwise not. To her, it's just one more person who wants something from her at the end of a long day at work,

      If sex is just a chore for her then you're doing it wrong. Please people, study these things. Study how to have great sex and full body orgasms. You've studied and practiced for everything else in your life, why is sex so ignored?

    30. Re:Fixed it for you. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      When a woman gets married and has children, her whole life changes. Her husband is no longer the focus of her life, her children are. She loses interest in sex, and doesn't see why she should have to do it any more. If she wants another child, sure, but otherwise not. To her, it's just one more person who wants something from her at the end of a long day at work, and this one she can actually say "no" to. So, she does.

      Meanwhile, the husband, cut completely off from one source of sex he is allowed to have, grows increasingly desperate and unhappy.

      There is an easy fix for this. They're called hookers.
      Stay married, and have as much sex as you can afford. Win, win.

    31. Re:Fixed it for you. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I'm 48 years old and 100% of the married men in my peer group (middle class, mostly white males married to mostly white females, all with white collar jobs) complain about their wives lack of interest in sex. ALL of them. I don't think any of the conventional explanations make sense.

      Of course it makes sense. Men want sex their whole lives, women only want sex to have kids. Society doesn't want to accept this and oppresses male sexuality by enforcing this primitive concept called monogamy. Once you accept that sexual monogamy is a myth, life gets a whole lot easier.
      (It's worth noting that social monogamy can still be maintained with sexual freedom, just don't tell the missus)

    32. Re:Fixed it for you. by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 0

      2) We're Christians, and regular sex is a commitment (1 Corinthians 7).

      So is not fucking children, but that doesn't seem to stop your lot...

    33. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are obviously not a realist yourself and have never met any, in order to misunderstand so badly. They're interested in causes of effects and tracing the causal chain back to its roots. So that, if one wants to modify the situation/circumstances, they can address the matter at its source rather than constantly treating the symptoms. Such an approach requires a lot of dispassionate observation, testing, and cognitive processing. So I can understand why a lot of folks, such as yourself, prefer shit-flinging, blame-gaming, and denial.

    34. Re:Fixed it for you. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      When women who have given birth hit their 40s, they lose their sex drive.

      No, quite the contrary in fact. I thought this was a well known fact?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    35. Re:Fixed it for you. by swb · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem to pan out that way, at least in my exposure to couples in their 40s. Every man I know in his 40s complains about the lack of sex in his marriage, and conventional explanations of imbalanced parenting, housekeeping, substantial physical appearance changes, etc always seem to be contradicted, often in multiple categories, in any given example.

      "Jeff" complains about sex being a 1-2 times a month activity, but Jeff does about 60% of the parenting in my experience, is 6 years younger than his wife and is outstanding physical shape and very attractive (when we go out, he's almost embarrassed at how often women hit on him in bars). His wife runs a freelance marketing business and he's a solo practice attorney, so both have jobs of about equivalent levels of responsibility and income as I understand it.

      My sense is that any theory of lessened sex drive in women over 40 may be contingent on marital status (ie, married) and childbearing status (have given birth) as strong influencers. Women who never married or never have given birth may have stronger social or biological influences that increase their interest in sex.

      With the recent FDA approval of flibanserin (the "female Viagra"), there has been a lot of debate over it with a not insignificant chorus of women supporting it because "they want to have sex but just don't have the desire". I'd also doubt that such a drug would get developed and put through FDA scrutiny if the company and investors lacked decent data that said a good sized market didn't exist for it.

      Like anything else, I don't think you can arbitrarily say "all older women don't want sex" or "women over 40 want more sex". It's probably most likely that both things can be true at the same time but with clusters of characteristics around both groupings.

    36. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way 99.9% of those men were cheating on their wives was using their own hand. That would be the realist's view.

    37. Re:Fixed it for you. by athenaprime · · Score: 1

      First off, the idea that marriage to a woman means that a man has "purchased" her compliance from thenceforth in all matters of sex. Protip: When a woman gets married and has children, her whole life changes AND SO DOES HER HUSBAND'S. If her husband discovers that teh_bewbz are no longer his toys and he has to share with the kid, it is up to him to learn how to share with the kid.

      Assuming that the husband's role is just to keep stumbling through doing what he always did is straight outta 1958 and does not fly with Real Persons of Lady Persuasion.

      Perhaps Mr. Desperate and Unhappy could try to modify his behavior with the radical change that the rest of his family has gone through.

      Of course, if he just married her for easy, convenient, unrefusable sex, that's probably not a match made in heaven in the first place.

      The real dialogue of the AM hack (after all the delightful schadenfreude of the "Family Values" crew's frequent-flyer statuses have been suitably mocked) should really focus on what marriage can and should mean. It's clear from the number of members (real or otherwise) that fidelity in marriage is a...somewhat fluid state in reality, as opposed to what the Powers That Be have declared. Maybe people will begin to understand that a modern marriage is a partnership, and within the relationship, it's the members of the marriage that should both agree to the same terms.

      On the other hand, maybe all we'll get is sick and tired of sex scandals.

    38. Re:Fixed it for you. by athenaprime · · Score: 1

      Aside from "Jeff"'s parenting contribution, passive physical attractiveness, and workplace productivity...do he and his wife actually *talk* to each other? Quite honestly, "Jeff" sounds like a hell of an employee, and I'd hire him in a heartbeat, but a spouse is not a resume. Even if "Jeff" is fulfilling all these task duties (while Mrs. "Jeff" is also doing parenting, housekeeping, financial contribution, and personal upkeep), does he *like* his wife? Does she like him? Are they friends? Do they socialize together? Does "Jeff" know what turns her on in bed? Has he ever asked? Or does he stick his fingers in his ears and say, "Lalala I can't hear you" whenever the subject of foreplay comes up?

      I'm seeing a lot of assumptions in this thread that treat a marriage as if it's a job interview or a performance review. These guys on AM--are they putting "good parenting skills" and "hard-worker with management potential" in their AM profiles? Hell, no (unless that's some new kink). They're putting, "Likes to party," or "adventurous" or "Let's play dress-up" - why is this not the purview of the women to whom they entrusted their seed and household?

      If you can't ask your partner for intimacy, then it's not biology, it's communication. There's something wrong there, and you both need to re-negotiate the relationship. "Jeff" might do better to start figuring out why he married Mrs. "Jeff" in the first place, if they still feel the same about each other, why or why not, and both figure out what to do about it going forward. At the very least, it'll save on his credit card bill.

    39. Re:Fixed it for you. by swb · · Score: 1

      I'm not "Jeff's" marriage counselor, nor exposed to all the private details of his or any of my other friend's lives. It could just be that birds of a feather flock together, and we're all generally friends because we share similar personalities and weaknesses and that just leads to a high correlation of similar relationship strengths and weaknesses.

      If you can't ask your partner for intimacy, then it's not biology, it's communication.

      You can ask for sex, but I don't think you can ask for intimacy -- intimacy requires an organic desire that originates within the partners. Sex can kindle intimacy, but it can't create it.

      I think one of the challenges, though, of the asking is that if you ask and you get it, what are you actually getting? Are you getting a partner who is motivated out of an organic, genuine interest, or are you getting a partner who's going along to get along?

      At best you might get a partner who provides a theatrically convincing orifice for you to orgasm in. At worst, you get an emotionally dead, passive participant, the stereotypical cold fish who just lies there and might as well have a visible thought bubble that says "Are you finished yet?"

      When people complain about "not enough sex" I suspect that it's not exclusively frequency that's the complaint, it's at least as much a complaint about a lack of organic, internally originated enthusiasm for sex.

      I think some men just don't care (the old joke: "Why do women fake their orgasms? Because they think men care."), and view sex as the same whether she just holds still long enough for him to finish or whether she puts on a garter and fishnet stockings and talks dirty. It wouldn't surprise me that lack of sexual satisfaction among married men today is a function of women who don't feel obligated to go along with "the marital duty" and men being more aware of what their wives actually want, creating a kind of negative feedback loop.

    40. Re:Fixed it for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm another data point to back up your theory. I'm in my early 40's, as is my wife, and our sex life pretty much came to an end once my wife was pregnant with our second child. Our sex life was pretty good up until then (a bit of a lull for a few months after the birth of our first child, but lack of sleep will often cause that). For six years after the birth of our second child in 2007 sex went down to an average of five or six times a year. Now it's down to zero - we haven't had sex in eighteen months.

      Of course, just because she doesn't want to have sex doesn't mean she has lost her proprietorial interest in me having sex. After her sister got divorced (due to her husband having multiple affairs) my wife said to me that if she ever found out that I had had sex with anyone else she would immediately leave me, and take the kids with her (of course what she actually meant was that she would kick me out of the family home, keep the kids and take at least half of my income into the bargain).

      I think that this is something any man planning on getting married should keep in mind - she gets to control your sex life, not you, and after you have kids chances are you can have a sex life or a marriage, but not both.

  16. Yeah... by erp_consultant · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and how many of those female profiles were just astroturf Ashley Madison profiles put there to entice men into joining?

    The whole thing is just a sad commentary on the current state of affairs (no pun intended) of the world we live in. Who are the real villains here? The cheating husbands or the people at AM that set up this apparently honey pot of a web site to lure men in and then charge them to delete their profiles after the fact? A curse on all their houses I say.

    1. Re:Yeah... by Djoulihen · · Score: 2

      and then charge them to delete their profiles after the fact

      You mean charge them to not really delete their profiles after the fact ?

    2. Re:Yeah... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Right - which evidently was part of the reason that the hackers got involved in the first place.

    3. Re:Yeah... by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My guess, based on my knowledge of regulatory requirements, is that the profile itself was actually deleted, however financial transactions all have a data retention requirement, 7 years or 5 years, I forget. So forcing men to pay to delete, results in the data about his profile being deleted, but that financial transaction tied to that process had to be kept.

      --
      I came, I conquered, I coredumped
    4. Re:Yeah... by grahamsz · · Score: 1

      I think the fact that I haven't seen any legitimate journalistic source actually interview people who've had a long string of torrid affairs from the site probably tells us how well it actually works.

    5. Re:Yeah... by RogerWilco · · Score: 2

      Well, one thing I understood from the linked article, is that except for the email address, which was changed to , nothing seems to have been changed on "deleted" accounts.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    6. Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you rob a robber.

      This is why you cheat a cheater.

      This is why you lie to a liar.

      There is a semi-safe haven for those doing distasteful acts to others who are doing distasteful acts. If one unmentionable act leads to another exploiting someone by using the same technique, it is hard to complain without exposing both parties. People tend not come to the aid of the unjust, even when the unjust is wronged. If you have to show that you were wronged because you were taken advantage of while performing an unjust act, you keep your mouth shut and the exploitation goes unpunished.

      In a truly just world, the exploitation of the unjust would be prosecuted just as vigorously as the exploitation of the just; however, it is hard to find people willing to invest effort in the unjust as they will be selective, and attempt to divert more effort into those they deem just.

      Lawyers have to be trained to defend the guilty,and are punished by losing their profession if they do so negligently. That's evidence enough that the average person doesn't already come with the biases to defend the wronged unjust.

      It's also why one of the old tureisims of the con man come to mind, "you can't cheat an honest man".

    7. Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We already know that cheating sucks ok, it's common knowledge. We're here to discuss the data and the scam, not obvious morals.

    8. Re:Yeah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "administrative fee" for the "full delete" process allegedly covered not only hiding or deleting a profile but also retracting profile actions such as messages in other users' inboxes. Just hiding or deleting a profile is free from what I understand. That said, the wording on the site makes it sound like ALL information about a former member would be removed, but only if you pay them 19 bucks. It's all horribly and confusingly worded, but looks like they were selling extortion insurance.

  17. No surprise by koan · · Score: 2

    I figured a site like that would be a sausage fest, women don't seem to have as much trouble getting laid as most men do.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:No surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ^^^this^^^

      The fattest, ugliest, dumbest woman in the world can easily find some horny schmuck.

    2. Re:No surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can totally attest to this - because I'd fuck her.

    3. Re:No surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beauty is just a light switch away.

  18. The article itself is well written by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No way, man! You don't fool me. I ain't clickin' on your bait

  19. a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a thief by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Likewise, Axe is a thief for selling boys on the idea that spraying themselves will make babes throw themselves at said stinky young men, and Pantene is a thief for selling women on the idea that using their brand of shampoo will make them supermodels.

    Or... gurps_npc is a socialist idiot who doesn't know how humans are actually motivated.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  20. Remarkable odds by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    You'd have a better chance of hooking up on Gilligan's Island.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:Remarkable odds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd have a better chance of hooking up on Gilligan's Island.

      That did happen, and here's the "proof"!
      http://home.earthlink.net/~bseinberg/pmafic.html
      https://www.fanfiction.net/s/6988302/1/Passionflower

    2. Re:Remarkable odds by Moof123 · · Score: 1

      Rule 34.

    3. Re:Remarkable odds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely. Mary Ann - what a slut!

  21. STEM College by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the ratio of men to women in STEM major colleges...

    1. Re:STEM College by ksheff · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sex Kills! Go to Tech and Live Forever! - actual bumper sticker sold by our college bookstore.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  22. You insensitive clod! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Ashley prefers to be called "Bruce" now.

  23. Women Count Too Low by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That doesn't sound right. I expect that the men completely outnumber the women, and that the 'women' are largely fake, but only 12,000?

    With all the advertising that AM has done, and with the huge number of women online (consider pinterest for heavens sake), and the huge number of women that have affairs, it seems unlikely to me that only 12,000 actual women signed up.

    --
    The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    1. Re: Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Agreed, my guess is they scrubbed a good chunk of the female users before releasing. They knew that stories involving women suffering negative consequences would turn the tide against them so they made sure to minimize the risk.

      Smart move but it again underscores that this data is extremely suspect.

    2. Re:Women Count Too Low by hawguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That doesn't sound right. I expect that the men completely outnumber the women, and that the 'women' are largely fake, but only 12,000?

      With all the advertising that AM has done, and with the huge number of women online (consider pinterest for heavens sake), and the huge number of women that have affairs, it seems unlikely to me that only 12,000 actual women signed up.

      Even if there are huge numbers of women interested in having affairs, that doesn't mean that they want to have random internet hookups from a cheating website. All online dating sites are the same -- the men far outnumber the women.

    3. Re: Women Count Too Low by kellymcdonald78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The data dump apparently contained ~5 million accounts marked as "female" with IP and email addresses. Strange that they would include that information, but scrub the fields indicating when said user had last checked their inbox

    4. Re:Women Count Too Low by Godai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A fair point. Plus, one has to consider that if harming AM was their primary aim here, releasing the data is bad, but releasing a subset of the data that demonstrates that kind of male-to-female ratio is perhaps far worse (for AM). If the ratio was 10:1, they're providing a fair service and just not having much luck attracting women; look at all those scumbags who are trying to cheat on their wives! If the ratio is 8000:1 though, look at all those scumbags running the site who are cheating people out of money! If you wanted to put a nail in their coffin, this is a great way to do it -- out the men, embarrass them, give them call to sue AM. Then doubly embarrass them as chumps; surely that'll push a few fence-sitters over the edge.

      It does make me wonder. The only way we could verify this is if a bunch of women who had accounts looked themselves up, didn't find themselves, and then self-reported. So we may never know either way on this.

      --
      Wood Shavings!
      - Godai
    5. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      >All online dating sites are the same -- the men far outnumber the women.

      Heh, I bet that's the case even with dating sites that cater only to lesbians.

    6. Re:Women Count Too Low by Socguy · · Score: 1

      There may be a large number of women on the internet and a large number of women having affairs but is that because they actively sought them out, or because life happened?

      With all we know about gender roles and social history, outdated as it may be, how many women do you imagine are looking for a guy who's on a website devoted to cheating? Just imagine, if you will, all the women sitting around pining for the married guy who's actively into infidelity so they can hookup and later make a Pintrest page of their exploits... Seriously, in what world do you imagine that a woman would find these guys remotely attractive? Of those 12000 real accounts most of them were probably for the purpose of pre screening real life dates... one more douchebag check on who NOT to date.

    7. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And only 1,492 women had ever checked their messages...

    8. Re:Women Count Too Low by swillden · · Score: 1

      That doesn't sound right. I expect that the men completely outnumber the women, and that the 'women' are largely fake, but only 12,000?

      With all the advertising that AM has done, and with the huge number of women online (consider pinterest for heavens sake), and the huge number of women that have affairs, it seems unlikely to me that only 12,000 actual women signed up.

      I made the same point to my wife. She said she wasn't surprised.

      Her explanation is that although there are plenty of unhappy women interested in affairs, she thinks women are more cautious and, more importantly, far less likely to be looking for sex rather than a relationship. If you want to find a relationship instead of a hookup, web sites aren't as good as real-world meetups (bars or whatever), and sites specifically focused on affairs aren't as good as general dating sites. I know AM tried to sell itself as a classier place, not just for hookups, but "Life is short, have an affair"?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    9. Re: Women Count Too Low by Socguy · · Score: 1

      What tide? Against who?

    10. Re:Women Count Too Low by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Eh, one point of order.

      I do not condone infidelity, yadda yadda yadda, but purely as a practical matter if one is looking to cheat on their spouse and wants things kept discrete, a better choice of partner is someone else who is already married. They have more skin in the game and are more likely to keep things hush hush, because they don't want to be exposed, either. If things go poorly, you can be less afraid of someone threatening to tell your husband, when you can also tell their wife.

      That said, yeah, I'm not convinced a website would be the best method of finding such a partner.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    11. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women like married men for cheating because it kills the prospects of any lasting relationship. I had to stop wearing my wedding ring when I was in a bar to avoid getting hit on.

    12. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would mean that my wife is one of 12,000? The count is simply too low.

      Now, 12,000 active women, that I could believe. But just because the profile is inactive doesn't mean it isn't attached to a real person.

    13. Re:Women Count Too Low by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      I know AM tried to sell itself as a classier place, not just for hookups, but "Life is short, have an affair"?

      And with a close up picture of a woman's full red lips. Mostly advertised on porn sites, whose viewership skews male.

      They did not place ads with a picture of a hot dude on pintrest.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    14. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > it seems unlikely to me that only 12,000 actual women signed up.

      Why? The site was for sex, and I don't know any women my age that are interested in that. I know I'm not. There's no reason for us these days to allow ourselves to be used for sex. We can support ourselves. We don't need to trade sex for security any longer. It's great living in a post-sex society. I really feel sorry for my mother that had to get married and become a breeder in order to survive. Of course, I wouldn't be here, but I'd rather not exist than have to live like that.

    15. Re:Women Count Too Low by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      With all the advertising that AM has done

      They weren't advertising to women...

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    16. Re:Women Count Too Low by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      So you're saying I should set up a cheating site on pinterest then?

      --
      Time to offend someone
    17. Re: Women Count Too Low by onthemightofprinces · · Score: 1

      So they decided to scrub the data of females on the site because... reasons? Then they decided to leave in the data of men looking for other men in countries where homosexuality's actually punishable by death...?

    18. Re: Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you missed the point of that detail. They weren't scrubbed; they were mostly blank precisely because they had never checked their messages because they were not real people...they were fake accounts. That was one of they key ways used to differentiate the 12000 "real" accounts from the millions of manufactured ones.

    19. Re: Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really strange at all.

      Their intended impact was maximum collateral damage against the user-base(using them as a proxy to attack Ashley Madison).

      "I haven't checked my inbox since 2009" is certainly a valid defense for someone who got married in 2011 and met their spouse in 2010.

    20. Re:Women Count Too Low by erapert · · Score: 1

      It's probably because AM advertised heavily on male-oriented porn websites.

    21. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if there are huge numbers of women interested in having affairs, that doesn't mean that they want to have random internet hookups from a cheating website.

      That's because women don't need a cheating website. Any woman that is a 5/10 and above is absolutely drowning in attention every waking moment of their lives.

    22. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually its probably about the same level on both sides, the main difference (which includes dating sites in general) is this:

      Women DO NOT have to go online to get laid or get dates. Period.

      What a women does is put on a red dress/skirt, red lipstick, and a pair of high heels and go to the nearest bar. ...thats it, she doesn't even need any money.....

    23. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A woman can sit herself down at a bar and screen suiters all night wile maintaining plausible deniability ("I'm just here for a drink it's not my fault guys keep chatting me up."), and not violate any long held social conventions about hookup etiquette.

      Men are by tradition expected to approach an proposition a women if they want to have sex with her, and that makes it more dangerous to go looking of an affair in a public place reachable from your home or place of business (someone you know could see you chatting up the ladies), as there's really no way to spin "I approached her and bought her a drink" as "I'm not the one initiating this interaction" when caught.

      A website appeals more to men because it shields them form scrutiny by bystanders and implies a larger supply of receptive women than a random bar. The same doesn't appeal to women as much as they already have a defense mechanism against being observed and only really need a handful of suiters which they can probably get at any bar.

    24. Re: Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's kind of funny that women prefer to travel to ashley madison computers to sign up with a ip address of localhost, and email accounts like 100@ashleymadison.com.

      Seems to me that if I wanted to "scrub" data, I'd just delete it, instead of taking the time to come up with random email addresses and setting ip addresses to valid (but worthless) values.

    25. Re:Women Count Too Low by swillden · · Score: 1

      I know AM tried to sell itself as a classier place, not just for hookups, but "Life is short, have an affair"?

      And with a close up picture of a woman's full red lips. Mostly advertised on porn sites, whose viewership skews male.

      They did not place ads with a picture of a hot dude on pintrest.

      So, what you're saying is that while AM claimed to be marketing heavily to women, that claim was just part of their actual marketing to their actual target demographic: lonely, unhappy men.

      I could buy that.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    26. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would women sign up if the ads are all geared toward men? And the men don't even need that much of an incentive, yet Ashley Madison pours all their marketing efforts into luring more men rather than bringing in women. That fact alone should scream "scam" to you before you even sign up. If it doesn't (and it didn't to so many men as we see here), then that just shows how stupid people are.

    27. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just goes to show you that AM knew long ago that luring women was a lost cause, so why bother trying. Lure in the men, take their credit cards, and get rich off their money.

    28. Re:Women Count Too Low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to this magnitude.

  24. Being Female by TheAngryCat · · Score: 1

    I find this whole Ashley Madison issue supports my belief that anybody who would cheat on their spouse / partner or whatever is a looser from the get go. Just goes to show there is a looser born every minute.

    1. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just goes to show there is a looser born every minute.

      Found one!

    2. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known plenty of married women who cheated on their husbands. Are they losers too? Actually, all of them were good people, just very unhappy with their marriage. As my mother would say, you are a judgmental cunt.

    3. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe if they were tighter instead of looser, they wouldn't get cheated on. They should try kegels or something.

    4. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean loser?
      The looser ones are the one son the gay sites

    5. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they are. They're deceptive and betrayed their vows to their spouse. How good could they be?

    6. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and apparently i can't spell either *sigh*

    7. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well apparently they are loose!

    8. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known plenty of married women who cheated on their husbands. Are they losers too?

      Obviously.

    9. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known plenty of married women who cheated on their husbands. Are they losers too? Actually, all of them were good people, just very unhappy with their marriage. As my mother would say, you are a judgmental cunt.

      One may be unhappy in their marriage, but I guarantee you cheating on your spouse will most likely not make it better.

    10. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. They should be tighter, not looser.

    11. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have trouble finding one woman... much less two.

    12. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And probably a woman too!

    13. Re: Being Female by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      A looser what?

    14. Re:Being Female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And probably a woman too!

      Naw, a woman would probably know how to spell.

    15. Re:Being Female by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      What does "being female" have to do with that?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    16. Re:Being Female by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      But they can probably still spell better than you can...

    17. Re:Being Female by TheAngryCat · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt that, however I have already given this comment more consideration than it is worth. You sir have a wonderful day.

  25. Nice Try! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article itself is well written, including a description of the analysis.

    Nice try! I'm not going to fall for your tricks to get me to RTFA, especially from Gizmodo.

  26. How many were there on business? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With that kind of demand, just saying...

  27. AM could be a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think it was an extortion honeypot, TBH. It's possible that the CEO has criminal connections, or ties to a government intelligence operation. Think about the leverage that could be applied to government officials, politicians, corporate managers, etc. with this information. For example, it's exactly the kind of info the CIA uses against foreign government officials in order to turn them into intelligence assets. And there's already reports of outed AM account holders being extorted to pay up to get their information removed or the blackmailers will forward the info directly to spouses, friends, family, and co-workers. The timing of the release kind of suspect as well. In addition, another site (Rentboy.com, I think) that potentially has damaging info on its account holders was recently raided by the FBI. What if that was a pre-emptive raid in order to keep its database from falling into the hands of hackers and released to the internet? This is Alex Jones territory, I know, but the stated reasons by the Impact Team for releasing the data just doesn't hold water for me.

    1. Re:AM could be a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My thoughts exactly.

    2. Re:AM could be a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's say it was meant to be an extorsion honeypot, or turned into one by some evil-minded AM employee.
      So lets say AM has been trying to extort some rich guy, and that he chose to turn to Impact Team.
      With all he got in his hands, he turned to extortion over, basically crashing all hopes of AM IPO.
      And releasing data packs one by one, possibly keeping the most valuables (for AM) in his hands.

      Want to know who that guy is? Look for the *ONLY* record that has actually been deleted from the leaked database.

    3. Re:AM could be a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They released the data because AM didn't offer them a pile of cash not to. That's what this was all about, a bunch of butthurt guys who finally clued in that, yes, I've been paying to chat with a fucking chatbot... and once they did, they found out that not only do they have to PAY to be removed from the listings, their data isn't actually removed at all.

      That's what this was and is about. It was never "oh look at the dirty cheaters". This could have been ANY site, the key here is they have thousands of PAID male members who really didn't want this info leaked.

      AM didn't pay, so they dumped the data. This was never about cheating, and it certainly wasn't about "removing the site completely" as that's just silly.

      Do I have sympathy for these people? Nope, they should have know better. Did they get ripped off? Of course, it's the internet. There's a million and one places to talk, meet, chat, date, cheat, for free. Why on earth would you add yourself to a database, with credit card details?

      I think it's funny how people are crapping all over the users of the site. If this was any other site, and they got hacked and released personal information, email, ips and credit card information into the wild, you'd all be flipping out, but because of this perceived moral superiority that's not the case, it's the opposite, and you all seem to be applauding this MASSIVE and ILLEGAL release of personal information.

      If you don't believe in freedom or privacy for those you disagree with, you don't believe in it at all.

    4. Re:AM could be a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my opinion:

      men should grow a pair and just go to the whores if they are that horny like it has always been done, maybe an undecover cop nails you but thats it, there is no shame in being nailed by a cop, they are just too similar too hookers anyway, hard to spot the difference, it can happen to anyone, even other pigs

      this way is worse because now hacking teams in siberia will blackmail them into oblivion

      but ideally you should just convert your woman INTO a whore, with a little direction every dude can make it happen, they tend to steer that way anyway, you just train them like a dog you are halfway there

      or you can be decent, dont call women whores and not cheat on the person you love, thats if you can actually love somebody

    5. Re:AM could be a honeypot by dmomo · · Score: 2

      If I were a subject of such extortion, I would be less likely to give in to the demands if the data were public. I would know that paying off one extortionist wouldn't prevent the next one from knocking on my door. So, if the CEO of AM were really doing this for that purpose, wouldn't his pretend hackers keep at least most of the data proprietary?

    6. Re:AM could be a honeypot by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      That seems a reasonable hypothesis except that the group didn't demand cash. They actually agreed to *not* release the data if AM would just go out of business quietly. Doing so may have been a better decision. Return any cash they had to the share holders and walk away.

    7. Re:AM could be a honeypot by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 1

      I believe it is safe to say virtually all major internet sites that gather data are intelligence assets. Google was initially founded with enormous amounts of DoD grants, for example. Personally, I was always suspicious of google as it really just came out of nowhere. The results were better, true, but it was the speed of the site that just seemed bizarre. Alta Vista was the best in those days - a technology showcase of one of the largest server manufacturers in the world. How did some Jews from Stanford get enough loot to go up against DEC?

      Even something like Bitcoin, if you look into it, is rather comical. Bitcoin is entirely insecure, and has an entire transaction history publically available for the "coin". It was designed to be tracked, undoubtedly to control the black market.

      The internet has, at this stage, proven to be a curse. A real shame.

  28. I rather suspect most women on it... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    ... were seeing if they could search for someone specific to catch someone.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:I rather suspect most women on it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how does that relate to the topic of the article? did you read it, or are you just karma-whoring here?

  29. TIL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    American men are even more horny and pathetic than I have previously believed. It's even funnier seeing this from the perspective of the grossly homophobic machismo that is American culture.
     

  30. Good Way for the Researcher to Cover His Own Track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone investigate if the researcher was exposed in the leak. I would think it is a good way to cover his own infidelities.

    1. I was on the site for research
    2. There was actually no women to cheat with.

    Sound suspicious to me...

  31. We need to do SOMETHING about this!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The gender gap is clearly a huge problem in online adultery sites. Microsoft and Google should start reaching out to underprivileged women with their search engines, displaying more links to sites like these. Close the adultery gap! We need more adulterous gaps!!!

  32. You are forgetting something crucial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're forgetting something very very important.

    Women don't need a website to find hookups and affairs.
    Under most circumstances, even unattractive women can walk into some dive bar and find someone to go home with after an hour or two if they really wanted to.
    This statement isn't some angsty gripe or complaint - it's just reality that it's easier for women to get men than it is for men to get women.

    Most women who want to cheat and have affairs simply wouldn't use a website to do it, and wouldn't need to.

    1. Re:You are forgetting something crucial by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      So your saying men are sluts?

      Sexist!

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:You are forgetting something crucial by nnull · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure they do. It's called facebook. More women use facebook than anything else. You're more likely to find a cheating partner on facebook than anywhere else without having to pay anything. And facebook would protect your damn privacy from your spouse more so than Ashley Madison ever would. So what's the point of Ashley Madison?

    3. Re:You are forgetting something crucial by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      it's just reality that it's easier for women to get men than it is for men to get women.

      Its also a LOT easier for a gay man to get sex than a straight man.

      Thats why so many sex-addicted men become gay.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    4. Re:You are forgetting something crucial by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Your saying that there are men that love pussy so much, they change over? Seems unlikely.

      More likely gay men are just as slutty as straight men. If it wasn't for women keeping us down, we'd all be getting pussy at a local park.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:You are forgetting something crucial by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Your saying that there are men that love pussy so much, they change over? Seems unlikely.

      More likely gay men are just as slutty as straight men. If it wasn't for women keeping us down, we'd all be getting pussy at a local park.

      Its not that they love pussy, they love getting off. So they change over. Seems likely to me.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  33. And nobody is surprised ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but should we think these stats have changed from ye days or yore in chatrooms?

    The sweaty fat guy pretending to be a female?

    I'm sure if you had honest reporting, there's be a bunch of creepy stats ... how many people got rolled in a hotel room thinking they were gonna get some, how many people have had extortion attempts, how many people have fapped to dirty chats which was really a guy on the other end.

    It's the freakin' internet, isn't the fact that a good portion of the women, especially the ones looking for sex, are actually bored guys?

    I'm sure people actually were getting laid, and a woman looking for a man is probably going to succeed. But I bet a lot of guys didn't do anything but chat with other guys without realizing it.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  34. Sol all these poor sods now getting exposed... by gweihir · · Score: 1

    ... did not have any real change of getting anything out of it? That is tragic, and makes the actions of those that have hacked the site and then published the data even more evil.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Sol all these poor sods now getting exposed... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Hold on, out of all of the players in this thing the hackers are the real bad guys?

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:Sol all these poor sods now getting exposed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. All of the actors involved are scum.

    3. Re:Sol all these poor sods now getting exposed... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Your brain is defective: This means almost nobody did anything bad over the site. Thinking about having an affair while being married does not make you infidel, having one does. But now all the people in the data-dump are regarded as if they actually have had an affair via the site, when that is not true for almost all of them.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Sol all these poor sods now getting exposed... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting concept of morality you have. You're saying it's "tragic" that the guys seeking affairs probably weren't able to have one because there were so few women, but also that those guys are innocent of any wrongdoing specifically because they couldn't find anyone to have an affair with. Not that they didn't try. For many of them, Ashley Madison was probably only one way to have an affair, I'm sure they also tried to find women in bars or other dating sites or whatever else. The presence of an Ashley Madison account means that, if they were married, then they were probably interested in having an affair, and if they were interested they probably also pursued other means to do that. Any many of them probably succeeded.

      So, based on your first post, where you said it makes the hackers "even more evil." If there were plenty of women on the site, you would say that the actions of the hackers are less evil? Your sense of morality is pretty fluid.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  35. dsfsd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow im shocked! men are more likely than women to cheat, some quick call the press!

    I cant believe this is even news, hey news flash! MOST DATING WEBSITES ARE FILLED WITH DUDES

  36. "12,000 actual, real women" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's more than Craigslist and all IRC channels combined!

    "The Internet - where men are men, women are few, and 17 year olds are cops"

  37. This does not round off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The data in the article does not answer who were the mails talking with. With other males?

  38. So what's with the maths in the summary???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was wrong with saying "For every 2250 men there was 1 woman"? Or even clearer: "There was 1 woman for every 2250 men"? WHY MAKE IT PER THREE WOMEN???????

    Just to inflate the numbers?

    As an aside, that one woman must bang like the shithouse door when the plagues in town. Remember, ladies, for every man cheating on their wife, there's a woman fucking your husband.

    1. Re:So what's with the maths in the summary???? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What was wrong with saying "For every 2250 men there was 1 woman"? Or even clearer: "There was 1 woman for every 2250 men"? WHY MAKE IT PER THREE WOMEN???????

      Clearly, that's how the researcher likes his sex. Personally, even when I was younger I don't think I could have managed more than a threesome.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  39. Re:Really? NASCAR buddy you forgot by rraylion · · Score: 1

    Indianapolis Nascar staduim 250,000 people.

  40. So they weren't really cheating! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So odds are the men on AM weren't really cheating.

  41. Re:Really? NASCAR buddy you forgot by FreeUser · · Score: 1

    Indianapolis Nascar staduim 250,000 people.

    "Let's do it in the road", with apologies to the Beatles.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  42. As a member by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have to disagree with the numbers.
    Unlike others, I insulated myself well, using prepaid Amex registered to a bogus name and address.

    As for the reasons, well there are a number, primarily the person I married is no longer the person I married. That aside, call me a coward if you want, but it is what it is.

    Now I did joy spend much, about $200. That equates to 400 credits, at 5 credits for initial contact (after which further communications are free). I never used the overpriced gifts and chat functions.

    That amounts to about 80 contact attempts. Response rate was about 15 actual females. That's not to say I jumped into bed with all of them, there does need to be a connection, so it's not always about just fucking. I was also very acutely aware of the fakes, one time curiousity profiles, and such. There are patterns you can see, and you avoid contacting new profiles for a while till you see them around a few times. I'm guessing the area you're in makes a difference too, major metro areas have the most fakes. Also way too many woman looking for a free ride, so basically prostitution.

    So yes, it is possible to connect with an actual female. If I had to guess, poor coding resulted in the fields the researcher used to generate the stats, where not actually being used reliably.

  43. At least a call girl is honest by MyAlternateID · · Score: 4, Insightful

    On a site like that - the only real women would be women that are either desperate or looking for other women.

    I had heard that most the women on AM were call girls. Now I doubt that, as I'd think there'd have been a lot more, but still, there's a third category for your list.

    They're women who know they're facilitating cheating and quite possibly destroying families - ever seen what divorce does to kids? Even the amicable divorces do a lot of damage, and divorces due to infidelity tend not to be amicable. A woman who understands she's doing that and is okay with that can't be trusted. These are the kinds of women who poke holes in condoms to get that child support money. If the cheating guy has any sort of standing in the community, like holding some sort of local office or operating any significant business, he can now be blackmailed - and that was before the data was breached. There's already been some suicides over this, in fact.

    A call girl would be an improvement.

    I'm no prude. I'm all for consenting adult people screwing around if that's what they want to do. When I was younger, I did my own share of that. But I didn't have to lie and cheat to do it, and neither do they. I was not married and I openly told the women I was seeing, up front, "hey I'm not looking for a commitment at this time, in fact I am going to see other people, if you want to do the same, be my guest". It was never an issue and they appreciated the honesty. But to marry someone and claim to make an exclusive commitment, and then abuse their trust like that, it's just plain fucked up. No "puritannical morality" is necessary to see how fucked up that really is. Ask anyone who's ever had it done to them.

    1. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      So you didn't RTFA.

      They're not "women who know they're facilitating cheating and quite possibly destroying families".

      They don't exist!

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    2. Re:At least a call girl is honest by MyAlternateID · · Score: 1

      So you didn't RTFA.

      They're not "women who know they're facilitating cheating and quite possibly destroying families".

      They don't exist!

      The fucking article said there were few women, not that there were none. The parent poster further speculated that some of those few women might be call girls. Thus I made an observation concerning what sort of women those are.

      Nice try, but as it turns out, that reading comprehension thing is important.

    3. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They're women who know they're facilitating cheating and quite possibly destroying families

      I would argue that facilitating the behavior is not what destroyed the family; the family was breathing it's last before an AM profile was ever considered.

    4. Re:At least a call girl is honest by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      Don't know about that. Some people have affairs because their marriage is dead. Spouse doesn't love them. Some people cheat on wonderful people who love them to death, because they're completely selfish assholes. I wonder how well one can predict from the AM data what percentage was what type, or what other types exist.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    5. Re:At least a call girl is honest by MyAlternateID · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're women who know they're facilitating cheating and quite possibly destroying families

      I would argue that facilitating the behavior is not what destroyed the family; the family was breathing it's last before an AM profile was ever considered.

      I mostly agree with you. Problems like that don't just happen overnight. They usually have deep roots that took time to develop. Unresolved issue piles atop unresolved issue. What is so often identified as the cause of a problem is typically just its most noticable symptom.

      The thing is, marriages have problems all the time. Many of those times, these things can be worked out if both people want to work them out. Cheating, though is a special form of betrayal. A marriage that could have been saved will usually reach the point of no return once that kind of betrayal takes place. Even the Christian tradition, so often portrayed as rigid and Puritannical, recognizes infidelity as a (often, "the") legitimate reason for divorce.

      I've personally known someone who cheated on his wife, not just once, but again and again, booking various hotels to do the deed, etc. Amazingly, his wife forgave him, though it took a very long time before she began to trust him again. Their only child was already an adult by this time, so these were genuinely her feelings and not some kind of sacrifice she was making. That's not the norm. Usually, that's the gunshot to the head of a marriage that previously just had a minor flesh wound.

      Make no mistake, anyone knowingly helping to make this happen cannot claim innocence.

    6. Re:At least a call girl is honest by MyAlternateID · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't know about that. Some people have affairs because their marriage is dead. Spouse doesn't love them. Some people cheat on wonderful people who love them to death, because they're completely selfish assholes. I wonder how well one can predict from the AM data what percentage was what type, or what other types exist.

      Life is too short to remain in a failed marriage. I don't really understand why people do this. It only takes a small shred of honor to end a failed marriage, honestly and openly, and then go screw whoever you want. The lying and the cheating is, like you mention, indicative of a selfish asshole. But even selfish assholes, being selfish, try to look out for their own interests. What interest would they have in sticking around when they don't want to? If money is their concern, this is what prenuptial agreements are for.

    7. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm no prude

      No, you're more of a self-righteous judgemental twat.

    8. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Fwipp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's kinda screwed up how you're blaming the women for "facilitating cheating" and causing dudes to lose their community standing and commit suicide. As opposed to blaming the cheating men - you know, the ones with an actual obligation to their wife and kids.

      Like I hear what you're saying - it's not good to get involved and be "the other woman." But their fault is minuscule next to the cheater's.

    9. Re:At least a call girl is honest by MyAlternateID · · Score: 2

      It's kinda screwed up how you're blaming the women for "facilitating cheating" and causing dudes to lose their community standing and commit suicide. As opposed to blaming the cheating men - you know, the ones with an actual obligation to their wife and kids.

      Like I hear what you're saying - it's not good to get involved and be "the other woman." But their fault is minuscule next to the cheater's.

      Nothing I said is inconsistent with that. In fact if you read my comments you'd know that I didn't mention the standing of the men at all. Honestly, I thought that part was so very obvious that it didn't need to be reiterated, other than my mention of how unnecessary and dishonorable the lying and cheating is. In fact my exact words were: But to marry someone and claim to make an exclusive commitment, and then abuse their trust like that, it's just plain fucked up. No "puritannical morality" is necessary to see how fucked up that really is. Ask anyone who's ever had it done to them. Does that sound to you like I'm giving these men a pass? "Just plain fucked up" is fairly clear language, is it not?

    10. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hypothetically, if my wife decides one day that she doesn't like oral sex anymore, am I supposed to go without it for the rest of my life? Or divorce her? That seems very fundamentalist. Oral sex with a prostitute would be ill-advised: that would be true betrayal, probably bringing STDs back home. Finding someone with whom I can get some on the side? The consequences are less serious for all involved.

      For an even clearer example, what if a guy's wife has some sort of serious accident and can't have sex anymore? Is divorcing her the right thing to do? Or should he be a martyr and never get laid? And if a man develops a condition that tanks his libido, should his wife leave him? That's always the right answer?

      When sexual dissatisfaction occurs, is self-sacrifice the answer? You're a sap. Is divorce always the answer, regardless of _love_, regardless of kids, regardless of whether your partner is dying of cancer? You're a monster.

    11. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I described in an above post, some people have affairs because there's something wrong with their sex life that they can't fix. Sure, it's better to not get into that situation, but it's entirely possible to be stuck in a committed relationship where the sex is just not working out. If you accept that humans psychologically need sex to thrive, it's immoral to ask someone to go without indefinitely.

    12. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > these [problems] can be worked out if both people want to work them out.

      And if the problem is sex, and one party doesn't want to work it out? Is divorce always the answer? For newlyweds, it probably is. Cut your losses. But always?

    13. Re:At least a call girl is honest by mjm1231 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This reminds me of the old joke:

      Q: Why is divorce so expensive?
      A: Because it's worth it!

      Of course, that means some people can't afford one.

      PS: Your ability to understand that people who are not you could have desires, motivations, or values that you do not share is astonishingly low, even for a Slashdot poster.

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    14. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because one person is devoted to the other doesn't mean it goes both ways. The more the one person who is crazy in love tries to convince the other person to feel the same way the more they are themselves responsible for what happens eventually. You cannot force a person to stay with you through sheer devotion.

    15. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because divorce is often more painful and expensive than remaining in a failed marriage? My ex cheated on me sporadically for about half of our miserable 16 year marriage (I lost count after affair #10). I finally threw in the towel, and went forward with it, but was financially wrecked because of it, nearly being foreclosed on and almost filing for bankruptcy. ($100k in debt, not counting the house I couldn't sell, and couldn't afford to live in) Eight years later, I'm remarried and mostly financially recovered, but I've paid over $140k in child support since then, and rarely get to see my teenage daughters these days. All they remember is that Daddy moved out, not that Mommy was an adulterous whore.

      Divorce sucks, and you can delude yourself for years that things will get better someday.

      - Necron69

    16. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let me tell you a true story of a guy I know.

      He and his wife had a child, and afterwards, she lost interest in sex. Her desire never came back, and that was it. He still loved her and she still loved him, but he wanted to have sex. So he did the 'right thing' and divorced her. Now, their story isn't so bad. He divorced her and it was amicable enough, he still visits almost every day (they live down the street from one another) but they live in different homes.

      My first advice to that guy would've been to have a consensual open relationship, but absent that possibility, I think that maybe having 'an affair' would've been a better solution than divorce. The result would've been nearly exactly the same (he doesn't even want a relationship with the women he sleeps with), but they wouldn't have had to live in different locations.

      Your view of infidelity and relationships isn't wrong, but it's somewhat incomplete. I can easily come up with a slightly worse case for this--they could've been living in the USA, for instance (they're in the UK). That would've meant that she would've lost any health coverage that he brought to the family through his employment. You can modify this scenario subtly in a lot of ways to make it worse, and sometimes the least bad option is going to be cheating on your partner so you can stay married and in the same house and sane so you can raise your kids properly.

      As someone that's consensually non-monogamous, this is all just abstract philosophy to me--I think there's too much emphasis put on sexual fidelity in the first place, and not enough on emotional support and availability. You can be monogamous with someone and still be a wholly shitty partner to them.

      So don't be too quick to judge the people that were paying for memberships on the site. Some portion of them are CPOS (cheating pieces of shit, in Savage Love parlance), but some of them are almost certainly people (and, according to the analysis, almost certainly men) that want to stay married but can't live in a sexless marriage anymore, or want to explore other parts of their sexuality that their partner can't provide. You don't know the story.

    17. Re: At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Redpill for anyone stuck in a marriage like this. Google it, change your life. Your welcome.

    18. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Divorce isn't a one cost scenario. If you are dead broke divorce is actually incredibly cheap. The more you have the more expensive and complex it becomes.

    19. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I think there's more than only two types of marriage. Some people are emotionally connected but not sexually. Some actually like to share. Some have marriages of convenience so sexual restrictions are not part of the deal, and some are happily married but simply need sexual variety. I'm sure there's many others.
      Imposing your own traditional view of marriage based on some concept invented by primitive goat herders has shown time after time to result in disappointment.

    20. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      But even selfish assholes, being selfish, try to look out for their own interests.

      Everything you do is selfish. People steal because it makes them feel good. Others give money to charity because it makes them feel good. People like being married because it makes them feel good. Some of them fuck around because it makes them feel good. At no point is there any option which isn't self serving in some way.

    21. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      The article comes to the conclusion that there are about 12,000 "real" women.

      For 31,000,000 men.

      Frankly, I think a ratio of 2583 men for one woman is a lot closer to no women than few women.

      But you like to get your moralistic whore-blaming thing in, so have a nice day.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    22. Re:At least a call girl is honest by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Affair(s) are a symptom, not the cause of your marriage's failure.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    23. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      >

      But you like to get your moralistic whore-blaming thing in, so have a nice day.

      nice way to be blatantly hypocritical.

    24. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      1. good for you for doing the right thing and dealing with it in a mature way, i understand how bad this sucks and you took the high road.

      2. why post as AC but then sign the message? just curious. (i know you probably won't reply, just throwing this out there)

    25. Re:At least a call girl is honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or people like me cheat on their spouse because even though I love her so very much, I want more in bed and she can't provide it. I also can't leave her because she's entirely dependent upon me for her livelyhood, and I'm not going to dump her on the street.

      I'm also probably a selfish asshole, certainly the asshole part. The day I got a call from one of the girls I had been sleeping with and she told me that she had a std and I should get tested was a pretty hellish day for sure. Luckily I was able to get the bloodwork test done at my doctor under the guise of a routine physical, and she never found out. I'm not sure what I would have done if I had actually contracted it, that probably would have driven her to suicide.

  44. Re:a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a th by captjc · · Score: 1

    Or... gurps_npc is a socialist idiot who doesn't know how humans are actually motivated.

    Well, what do you expect from a Non-Player Character in the General Universal Role Playing System? Sounds like little more than a personality-less stat-sheet to me.

    --
    Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
  45. worthy of Bill Gates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a scam worthy of Bill Gates. I bet he's jealous that he didn't think of it first.

  46. Re:a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a th by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Kind like those "women" on AM?

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  47. And slashdot too!!... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And slashdot too!!...

  48. 2500 men for every woman? by Snufu · · Score: 2

    Their tagline should have been: "Life's short, have a gay affair."

  49. Duh? by ExekielS · · Score: 1

    If you are a woman, you just go to any dive bar where you are unlikely to see anybody you know, maybe a town over to meet somebody, or do so discretely in other ways. Given that most women have an endless stream of men drooling after them, it is trivial for them to cheat, whereas for men it is very difficult and takes a lot of effort to find somebody. This is the expected results.

    --
    ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
    1. Re:Duh? by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      If you are a decent looking woman, you just go to any dive bar ...

      FTFY.
      Plenty of big ugly fatties out there not getting any...

    2. Re:Duh? by ExekielS · · Score: 1

      Maybe in your neck of the woods, but in the big city there is *always* a giant demand for hideous fat asses as well. Even the worst looking, unfashionable, stupid, fat women I knew couldn't go on public transit without getting 5 guys numbers.

      --
      ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
  50. I was on Ashley Madison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I agree there were "fake" ads, I'm sure there were more than 12K women on the site. I met several "real" married women on the site so I can attest there were real married women there.

  51. These woman are working by Bruinwar · · Score: 1

    It's an "arrangement", these woman are not lonely housewives. The few they got signed up are pros.

    --
    SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
  52. And a *lot* of improbability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Curious, I opened an account there one month, a while back. I asked for women *over* 40. Of the *very* few responses I got, only one claimed to be (and just barely); I think they had auto-email, because *all* the rest were 24 yrs old +/- 1 yr, hot girls.....

                    sign me, "yeah, right"

  53. Oh the irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject

  54. They ought to teach this in schools... by Richard+Kirk · · Score: 1

    The Ashley Madison scam is not really that different from selling bogus cures to baldness, snoring, erectile disfunction, or cancer, or promising Russian brides, or bogus kickstarter projects (you can usually sport these, but someone must think they are worth doing). The internet can reach people in such numbers that it is even worth posting 'you won't believe..' set of pictures (usually photoshopped) for the tiny advertising rewards. We can either say that this is natural way of things: that the cunning should rip off the dumb, or we can do something about it.

    In this particular case, Ashley Madison claimed to have a sex ratio of about 1:6, which might make it compatible with reputable dating agencies. However, it is not likely that there are millions of Smoking Hot Babes Just Waiting For You out there. If Ashley Madison once had one good-looking lady on the books, the AM sysadmin would have got her first. It is not only likely that the Ashley Madison scheme is just as reported, it is almost impossible that it could have been anything else. There might be a real site somewhere, but it is so much more efficient to be a scam.

    Ashley Madison is perhaps not a proper subject for schools. However, schools do try to encourage smaller children to be nice to each other, and cautious of strangers. It might be sensible to introduce them to the net alongside instructive examples of pictures that aren't real (Snopes tear-down of the sharks in the flooded mall picture), offers that are too good to be true (pyramid schemes), how to know the person you e-mail is a real person (meet Eliza), and so on. I think this would make most children more aware of what might be happening on the other side of the screen; and it might even discourage the few who might be tempted to run scams when they see how little the returns must be.

  55. Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    https://youtu.be/yrHEu-c2UFg?t=285

  56. Strange in that recent research shows F/M skew by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    The bizarre thing is that recent sociological research shows that in fact there are many more college educated women than men, in some places (like NYC) it's up to 3:1 F:M.

    However, maybe the myth that they "want to cheat" might be what's at odds.

    I'll just be over here on Tinder where the real ratio matches the sociological research.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  57. Re:No big surprise here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Found another woman on \.! ;)

  58. Re:a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a th by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Likewise, Axe is a thief for selling boys on the idea that spraying themselves will make babes throw themselves at said stinky young men

    I assume the purpose is that Axe will dissolve the nose lining of any of its victims thereby rendering them unable to smell the remaining BO.

    Pantene is a thief for selling women on the idea that using their brand of shampoo will make them supermodels.

    I assume from this that you've never grown your hair long. Trust me, if you have long hair, and especially if it's not just dead straight, you need proper haircare products to keep sane. I thought I could wing it with cheap stuff, but that didn't work.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  59. RE: by TheAngryCat · · Score: 1

    If you have to cheat on your partner and risk bringing some STD back home then perhaps divorce is in order or maybe time spent with someone in the mental health industry. Have a Great Day sir.

  60. Should be called, Arthur Ash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He gay!

  61. I joined it ;) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One lonely night many years ago, after hearing my neighbors fuck too many times while I was single, I joined it. But... never logged back in.

    The worst $40 spent, as I recall (although I didn't see my name in the credit card transactions, so maybe I didn't pay). And the best $19 never spent apparently!

    I wonder how many others were similar case.

  62. Re:a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a th by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Don't assume.

    Anyway, cut your hair, and no more need for "proper hair care products to keep sane".

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  63. What, no X-Forwarded-For? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think the author understands how either IP addresses or common components in a multi-tier application work, whether it's a load balancer or proxy forwarding HTTP requests or an application communicating with another system using some other protocol.

  64. Re:a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Likewise, Axe is a thief for selling boys on the idea that spraying themselves will make babes throw themselves at said stinky young men, and Pantene is a thief for selling women on the idea that using their brand of shampoo will make them supermodels.

    Or... gurps_npc is a socialist idiot who doesn't know how humans are actually motivated.

    FYI: The Axe commercial campaign was created by a woman...

  65. Mane and Tail by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Not just for horses, Wilburrrrr

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  66. Gonna dispute that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posting anon for obvious reasons...

    Been on AM for 6 years now. Had 5 relationships lasting between 6 months to 2 years. Either I just took a huge chunk of the few women there, or the stats cited here are made up.

  67. real women by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I met 4 real women, had affairs with 2 of them. guess I beat the odds

  68. There were some real women... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Posting anonymously for obvious reasons...

    In the city I live in (one of the top 10 for population in the US), there were real women on AM who would respond and meet in person. I met two of them for drinks. Of course, the reality of AM is that for me and the women I met it was just a form of marriage counseling where we needed someone to talk through some issues with. In both cases we talked openly about the challenges that arise at different points in marriages and how sex can suffer. We never talked fantasies and, despite obvious chemistry in one of the meetings, never thought of going further than casual conversation. Finding someone to talk to seemed to be what we were after.

    Of course, they may have gone on to do more with other men. But, the only reason they said they responded was because mine one of the only non-creepy messages they received. Apparently even married guys think dick pics and very forward sexual comments are the best way to get a woman's attention (tip: no).

    1. Re:There were some real women... by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I dabbled in Tinder for a while and made a killing based on this same strategy. Just not being a jerk seems to put you ahead of 99% of the pack...

    2. Re:There were some real women... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a different experience. Over the course of five years, I met five women on AM. I had sex with every one of them, many, many times and typically starting on the first meeting. They were not all married. A couple of them were single and wanted to stay that way. They just preferred married men.

      One of them had a part-time job doing frat parties and bachelor parties. She had a very big and muscular "trainer" too. And at the end of these marathon sessions, she'd go home and make dinner for her kids, help them with homework and watch TV, then make love to her husband that night. He didn't know a thing. What she and I had was a mutual kind of understanding. A real *personal* friendship. And because of the kind of people we are, it included a LOT of sex too.

      Listen-- there are literally ALL KINDS of people in the world. It makes me sick to see all this pomposity and judgement people have without knowing the first thing about the psychology behind why some of us have sexual addictions and others have substance addictions and still others have gambling addictions. I read a book once that explained it pretty well. I think it's an e-book on Amazon. "True confessions of a male sex addict" by John Doesem.
      And, if you really want an eye opener, google for the female sex addict bulletin boards. But be careful, your mind may explode if it's not open sufficiently. This is a real world, and it's a lot bigger and more weird than most people even want to know about.

      Anyway, the five adorable and vivacious people I had affairs with were all wonderful. But to find them I had to make it a part time job. I must have sent thousands of messages, and I had the advantage of a very carefully crafted and in-the-know kind of profile. There's a specific kind of language our types use, don't'cha know.

  69. Re:Really? NASCAR buddy you forgot by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    "Why don't we do it in the road". If you're going to quote the Beatles, get it right!

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  70. So... That means... by morgauxo · · Score: 2

    So most of these guys whose lives are now ruined never even got any out of it in the first place? Or was that a very busy few women? Oh, man, and I already thought it was a stupid thing to sign up for!

  71. wow by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    There are some REAL sluts out there. 3 women to 7000+ men? WOOF.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  72. What do you call a man with breasts? by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1

    . . . old! . . . (bah-doom boom!)

  73. Re: by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    If you shake someone's hand and risk bringing some respiratory disease back home then perhaps divorce is in order or maybe time spent with someone in the mental health industry. Have a Great Day ma'am.

  74. I find it doubtful by maroberts · · Score: 1

    That the ration was 2500 to one. Many people are saying to the BBC and others that they had little trouble meeting on the site.

    There probably was a big disparity for all the reasons stated, but I'd be surprised if the end result was greater than about 50:1

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  75. Re:Really? NASCAR buddy you forgot by Tom · · Score: 1

    Since we are two orders of magnitude away from the goal, +50% really doesn't matter.

    Also, I agree with WP to not consider race tracks as "stadiums". And I rarely agree with WP.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  76. SHOCKED!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shocked I tell you!

  77. That does it by mnemotronic · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm deleting all 6 of my accounts. I simply cant abide dishonesty.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  78. Fraud. by Fragnet · · Score: 1

    I hope the people who created/run that site a prosecuted for fraud. And all of the others, like PlentyOfFish.

  79. OK I'm Ready: They Hacked Themselves by r-diddly · · Score: 1

    Theory: Ashley Madison (Avid Life) "hacked" i.e. leaked, their own data as a publicity stunt (since their site was pathetic). Occam's Razor - it explains a few things quite simply. It explains how they managed to hack in. (No hacking involved.) It explains why they're so confident as to offer a huge bounty for the hackers when it seems clear they're about to go broke. (No hackers will be found.) It explains their strange silence to their customers. (You know like the guy who kills his wife, but claims she's missing, but then the cops get phone records and find out he's the ONLY one amongst all her friends & relatives, who ISN'T blowing up her phone with "Where are you?" messages.)

  80. I love women by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This should be good news for males in general, trust your wives, they are pretty decent people. Thats why I say women should be in charge of the world,,, they are so much more trustworthy.

  81. Japanese had a solution for that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the wife refused to have relations with the husband it would normally fall on her to be responsible for aquiring the surrogate to replace her in those duties. At this point her and the husband could have seperate rooms, and he would just go on an overnight business trip when he had needs to take care of.

    There is a good possibility some of this goes on in america as well. Perhaps it is time to have a serious discussion on the repressive and puritanical expectations pushed on us by the social minority.

  82. Regulation looms by seoras · · Score: 1

    You only have to look at the affiliate marketing commission being offered by these casual dating sites to see it's "men only"
    I had a look at this a few years ago but, as my website is 95% female audience, it made no sense to try it.
    So if they have no interest in paying for referrals of women where do the women come from?
    Digging deeper you'll find that most of the affiliate partners are the porn websites.
    The conclusion I came to was that the entire "casual dating" industry was just the monetisation of the online porn industry.
    The BBC did an expose on it a few years back.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1TNwC4ctNE

    I've wondered how long it'll be before this gets political and regulated.

    1. Re:Regulation looms by seoras · · Score: 1

      I meant to add..
      The majority of the porn and casual dating businesses are almost entirely run out of east Europe (Ukraine and Russia).
      The whole Ashley Madison thing looks like a rival take down.

  83. Re:a realist would say Ashley Madison is just a th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Generic

  84. Re: by TheAngryCat · · Score: 1

    Maybe..... Maybe Not................

  85. You're a Wizard, Harry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but let's be honest here, men need to have sex in order to keep healthy and sane.

    That explains a lot about Wizardchan.org.

  86. And this is surprising because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Duh. What a shocker.

  87. Unleash the Lawyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This situation is calling out for a class-action suit. I am just curious about how many men would join the lawsuit. Can they remain anonymous?

  88. Oops, Bad Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet the people who committed suicide over this are feeling pretty stupid right now.

  89. No real woman on Ashley Madison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fine I will post as "anonymous coward"...just some real world facts to add to the conversation.
    ] I have been on and off the AM website since 2008. I have met countless woman and have had
    a a number of relationships lasting from a few months to almost a year. I also have probably had
    sex with at least 20 girls from that site. Am I proud of this? No..just putting some real experiences in the conversation.There are definitely fake profiles
    on the site but most are pretty easy to recognize. I am in my early 50`s ...look like i`m about 35...have been with girls ranging from 20 to
    45. Save your outrage not interested.

  90. oh really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lesbians tend to be more particular and nit-picky than straight women or straight men. Where did you get your facts?