a) AM did not verify email addresses? Ie, you could register someone else’s email address and they may not know it.
b) AM had users in repressive regimes where non-hetrosexuals faced violence/death? For some of AM’s users, the promise of a discrete forum represented a less-dangerous way to find partners
c) Additionally, AM was generally know to be a good place for queer/gay/bi/etc users to hook up even in non-repressive regimes.
d) It’s unknown how many users were single or ethically non-monogamous.
e) It’s unknown how many users were researchers/journalists/or just simply curious.
I understand your post is a joke, however it’s in poor taste. Also even if everybody involved was demonstrably a cheater, I don’t think it’s good for EA’s image to be seen as a finger wagging movement.
To expand on my last point: my understanding of effective altruism is that it is expansive. Generous. About becoming “more the people we wished we were”. I do not see it as a movement that ridicules or comes from schadenfreude or is punitive. The AM hack is the result of horribly unethical business and software practices, and its fallout is causing a lot of suffering. That’s why I think it’s bad for EA’s image if ‘we’ are seen to be joking about it.
Committing adultery causes a lot of suffering. Punishing people for anti-social behavior is an important part of any society, to incentivize good behavior. To the extent that western societies hardly punish this behavior at all, despite the huge amounts of suffering it causes, appropriately disincentivizing it could be an extremely effective way of improving the world.
People might enjoy a joke article I wrote, where I argue that Ashley Madison (the Infidelity website) was an Effective Altruist plot all along. Categorize it under the EA equivalent of crazy startup ideas.
Ashley Madison was set up by an activist who wanted to promote ethical behavior and punish the unjust.
Firstly, it took money from people who wanted to commit infidelity. Taking money from people makes them worse off.
Then, it didn’t provide any services. It never matched any cheaters up.
After having handed over credit card details but not received anything, the would-be cheaters realized it was a scam.
Then can’t take Ashley Madison to court, because that would be public record.
So they try to get out … but realize Ashley Madison has them in an incriminating position.
Ashley Madison extorts more money from them to delete their data.
Ashley Madison does not delete the data.
Ashley Madison discusses a possible IPO purely for the publicity. It knows it’s a fraud and could never stand up to auditing.
Ashley Madison then hacks itself. This explains why they were able to access the data so easily. They had previously hacked another competing service.
Ashley Madison then releases the data. This provides early downloaders with the opportunity to extort the would-be cheaters.
Eventually all the would-be cheaters are revealed, and face the wrath of their poor spouses.
No-one ever trusts an infidelity website again, making it harder to commit infidelity in future
So the net result is:
Would-be cheaters are effectively fined a significant amount of money.
And then exposed.
And no-one can ever create an infidelity website.
Do you know that:
a) AM did not verify email addresses? Ie, you could register someone else’s email address and they may not know it.
b) AM had users in repressive regimes where non-hetrosexuals faced violence/death? For some of AM’s users, the promise of a discrete forum represented a less-dangerous way to find partners
c) Additionally, AM was generally know to be a good place for queer/gay/bi/etc users to hook up even in non-repressive regimes.
d) It’s unknown how many users were single or ethically non-monogamous.
e) It’s unknown how many users were researchers/journalists/or just simply curious.
I understand your post is a joke, however it’s in poor taste. Also even if everybody involved was demonstrably a cheater, I don’t think it’s good for EA’s image to be seen as a finger wagging movement.
To expand on my last point: my understanding of effective altruism is that it is expansive. Generous. About becoming “more the people we wished we were”. I do not see it as a movement that ridicules or comes from schadenfreude or is punitive. The AM hack is the result of horribly unethical business and software practices, and its fallout is causing a lot of suffering. That’s why I think it’s bad for EA’s image if ‘we’ are seen to be joking about it.
Committing adultery causes a lot of suffering. Punishing people for anti-social behavior is an important part of any society, to incentivize good behavior. To the extent that western societies hardly punish this behavior at all, despite the huge amounts of suffering it causes, appropriately disincentivizing it could be an extremely effective way of improving the world.