800,000 lusers*
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
496 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
59566 readers
4696 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I really, really hope they used a backdoor.
”Money making is a skill,” the website states. “We will teach you how to master it.”
step 1: convince people to pay you 50$ for access to your deranged ramblings.
there is no step 2
Wonder how many were bots, like Ashley Madison, that exist to pump numbers and increase engagement
Omg 800,000 people (presumably mostly young men) signed up for that bullshit? Have we failed so many that they will seek help with the top douchebag himself?
I don't even think it's Andrew Tate specifically and I think that's a big problem.
I'm in my early 30s and grew up being 'the tech generation', adults marvelled at our simple abilities. Now I see 20 something's and even teens and they've surpassed us in every way, not so much in technical skill but they live in social media.
Smart watches, tik toks, face time and yada yada. It seems like a borderline gamble what will tickle their fancy or even what the algorithm will just repeatedly shove down their throat until they 'like it'.
I guess what I'm saying is I think the reliance and love of technology is what pushed a lot of these young guys into listening to this fucking clown as opposed to straight up ideology.
I am not sure that technology alone is to blame. But I have been thinking for a while now that recommendation algorithms should be open, scrutinized, and regulated even.
Yes, we have failed far more than that.
There’s very much a vacuum for what healthy masculinity looks like, and shitheads like Tate are filling that void
I think you’re spot on.
It makes me sad, especially knowing my son is going to face the same propaganda. I just hope to arm him with the knowledge to see past it.
Knowledge and unconditional love should do the trick 🤞I have found that the men most prone to this are men with a chronic lack of love and self-esteem.
Who is this Andrew Tate guy? By his name, I can only assume he is some kind of potato
He's one of those "Alpha Male" influencer who's extremely misogynistic
load more comments
(4 replies)
That is correct.
No notes.
Data brokers will now have a new set of identities for Insecure White Male with No Financial Literacy.
Don’t forget easily manipulated
Thats the important part ;)
Read the article, it's so much better than the headline lets on. Trolled him, email addresses, full forum and chat content, etc.
Whoo, which would be more embarrassing? Being exposed by this leak or the Ashley Madison one. I would love to see a list of email addresses that show up in both datasets.
One of the takeaways of AM being hacked was that a ton of accounts were fake, and existed to create the idea of a busy site, to add social proof and validity-by-numbers.
The AM hacks were like decade and change ago, and Tate's fanbase is mostly younger. I'm sure there is some overlap but probably small.
800,000 people fell for that scam? Fuck me, that’s a lot of stupidity..
Remember Trump University? Imagine putting that on your resume.
At 50$ a pop it's 40 000 000$ Grifters gonna grift ! Sometimes I hate that I have morals stopping me from exploiting those morons.
It’s worse than you think; it’s $50/month!
Now part of the problem is we don’t know the average membership length, and it’s further complicated by the fact that the Tate brothers ran the ‘school’ like a pyramid scheme where enrolling another member earned you a kick-back (which is why so many random channels popped up a few years back sharing clips).
So pulling random numbers out of my arse, if the average membership period was ~6 months and they had ~30% operating expenses (servers, bandwidth, kickbacks etc.) they could have netted ~$168m from this scheme.
I too, share your self-loathing in my morals preventing me from exploiting these absolute morons.
i think registration and actually sending any money will be two separate steps, but it is still lot of dumb people.
Maybe most of these are bots? And maybe paid by the owner to generate traffic?
People is stupid
load more comments
(3 replies)
It's interesting, the first time I saw a picture of Tate I only saw cringe, and that has not changed.
I'm sure there are people who look like Tate but are not complete assholes.
We have a friend who looks a ton like him when he mean-mugs, but is nicer than all of us combined, which just makes his Tate face funnier.
Oh absolutely, but I haven't met any one dressing like him who I have liked
load more comments
(2 replies)
It’s hard not to feel bad for aimless young men who get tricked by this guy.
You mean misogynists? I tend to not feel bad for misogynists.
I love that 5 men downvoted you. How dare you have morals lmfao. I appreciate it though.
I take as a positive point that I had no idea who this Andrew taint guy was before the he was arrested or whatever the fuck.
800.000 people?
Talking bullshit seems to pay very good
yes not everyone was paying, but still:
If accurate, the site at minimum would generate upwards of $5,650,000 every month.
load more comments
(2 replies)
That's too bad.
Time to see if people I suspect of being on it were on it.
HaveIBeenPwned has the list.
My friend's brother almost fell victim to this cult. If he's anything to go by most members will be vulnerable idiots.
I talked my then 17yo nephew away from the whole Tate/Peterson/Rogan sphere a couple years ago. It's really sad how few quality role models there are for young men these days, and these shills are happily filling the spaces.
Thank you
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›