What leads a person who intends to engage in clandestine relationships to pay for the service with their own credit card? How it occurs, if a public official, registered with the email address that provides the state? What is the mental mechanism that leads someone to exhibit at Internet privacy in the crudest manner with full name and actual address?
Such is the scenario that emerges after the massive data theft Ashley Madison, the largest site for infidels of the Web (yes, I said well is beginning to sound extravagant, right back on the point, because this is key), with about 124 million visits per month and 37 million subscribers. As with photos of celebrities last year, those affected were not only victims of hackers, but also a cultural divide. They bought the illusion that computers are infallible in any way. That the Internet can be anonymous. The bits are reliable simply because they are new technologies .
It’s pretty Clearly they were wrong, and the strange thing is that they were wrong in what are supposed to be experts, ie, in cheating. I do not, please, try them; really. But it is clear that no husband will tell his wife the morning, “Honey, remember that today I’ll be unfaithful to my secretary, will you not wait up for me?”. By contrast, will outline vague. “Acordate that I have to now be until later in the office”
So it’s remarkable to begin with someone who has built the habit of lying unhesitatingly subscribe to a site that is seen as “service leader in the world extramarital dating”. I wonder: leader compared to what
In English (but not in Spanish), the site also reports that it has more than 39 million “anonymous members?”. To me that would inspire me clarify doubts. It is something that is taken for granted, if it comes to extramarital dating. It’s like a lifeline to take the inscription: This fleet . Moreover, then there will be to put the credit card; . anonymity of the strangest
As if this were not enough, the image that occupies almost the whole page is that of a young girl with index on the mouth, suggestive finger gesture secrecy; the ring exhibits, and almost certainly is no coincidence, a marriage alliance. Is it me or is there a contradiction here? I mean, the secrecy is not processed in full screen.
Obviously. But what does this contradiction mean? In my opinion, subscribed to the service-an overwhelming majority of men, as will be seen right away- perhaps they intended to cheat, but give the impression of being something rookies. Therefore, the proposal of Ashley Madison hit them like a glove, to use an analogy to tone. These adventures were made elusive in the real world were now at hand. It was only a matter of registering and then have hundreds, maybe thousands of prone to infidelity just a click away women.
However, a demographic analysis of the filtered data, which met on Thursday and on La Nacion reported the same day, shows that the universe of Ashley Madison could be very different from that envisioned these millions of seductive caught red-handed .
Apparently, only a handful of real women used the site (12,000); the rest were false profiles created by Ashley Madison to attract the male audience. An attraction hopeless, frankly, because the difference is such that on site only have one real woman for every 2,500 men. If true, it would be easier to have an adventure in the deep Sahara subscribing to this site.
Adding all, I have the conviction that the design, message, aesthetics and winks Ashley Madison are modeled on purpose. No points unfaithful husbands and wives, but a male club where there is more desperation than disloyal.
Does this explain such gender difference? In my view, yes. The reason is apparent, again, the contradictions, starting with the brand: Ashley Madison (two female names). But there is something deeper and pitiful. The proposed site can only be attractive to men who are willing to pay for sending a message to a woman or to read the messages you send them a woman (such are the rules). That is exactly the kind of man most women (married or not) try to avoid. Which the ladies have the privilege to start conversations free returns even more revolting deal for most of them, because it sounds like you are using them to extract some money to these unfortunate lovers.
it Is opposite sites for getaway in the fertilizer enables communications (messages, chat) unlimited with any other member of the community scheme. Under these conditions, women are equal to men, not a commodity.
But there or not married men on the site? Surely, of course. Just as men posing as women. And even trolls, who would take the opportunity to pose as humans, although barely. That is, all the online folk who learned to detect more than 20 years ago in IRC channels
As a business, it also uses an old and trite model. promise to men (a certain type of men, rather) specify relationships with women easily, quickly and anonymously, which is exactly what you crave those guys, and the main reason why it so difficult to start a romance in the real world (or at the sites to getaway). No relationship, let alone loving, it operates at a click. Not even when it comes to clandestine relations. I’ll say it best: nothing in life works at the click
Now, reaches a certain degree of loneliness and despair for 10,000 government officials from the United States and England have subscribed to a dating site. I extramarital using the e-mail paid by the taxpayers? Many were annotated with the mailing address of the corporation where they work. How is possible? Remove an e-mail costs zero and leads, more than 3 minutes and 45 seconds, more desperate you are.
In this monumental slip there was, perhaps, the need to believe that the site was namely protect your personal data. Ultimately it is for unbelievers! (Did I mention that this sounds incongruous?) Furthermore, the cover receives the casual visitor with a logo that says: “Insurance Certificate and Reliable”. In English, however, reads: “Trusted Security Award”. He spent a prize certificate, but it is less: the medal award rate is not clickable. It does not lead to any certificate or any award of any recognized authority. No wonder that, according Vocativ, has no record of such an award even exist.
It is almost childish, but if Ashley Madison it worked so well is because there is a simplistic and naive confidence in new technologies . True, computers seem trustworthy, so shiny and polished, as cybernetic and modern. What can go wrong? Well, almost everything can go wrong.
Ashley Madison employees came to his office on July 12 and found threatening messages on their screens, paired with the song “Thunderstruck” by AC / DC . They had been hacked and taken the entire database of subscribers. The attackers promised to publish it if the site was not removed. They met, for fear of millions of people who had trusted in the Trusted Security Award .
Now, if this dozens of times happened in the past, if they steal each year Data from hundreds of millions of users of services of all kinds, from a retailer of building materials to RSA, the largest security company in the world, why they trusted? Worse, unlike with credit cards, banks and serious e-commerce sites in Ashley Madison no refund possible. What game was not put in some money, but their reputation and marriage. Why trusted?
As far as I can see, digital ignorance. Just trust 100% in computers who do not know what makes an electronic brain, what it is and how the software works how data is transmitted on the networks and how they try to protect them. He who does not know is how he sees. For digital devices, and Internet programs, blindness is double, because machines can process data and communicate with each other breathtaking speed and in a language that is completely foreign to us.
Having known the absolute opacity of electronic circuits, having pondered the great illusion that the machines must make intelligible to resultarnos, customers of Ashley Madison would have preferred to seek affairs elsewhere. .
No comments:
Post a Comment