Do-gooders do bad things to baddies who call them baddies for exposing the baddie's bad things.
AM creates site to do something immoral but legal. Hackers expose immorality by doing something illegal. AM users are angry, like a burglar being angry about getting caught. It's understandable, but is it defensible? In the case of burglary, it is both immoral and illegal. In this case the act is immoral yet legal. So, when the law and morality are on opposite sides, who should care? The police will drag their feet, the public will look on with only vague interest. In Saudi Arabia the law and morality are on the same side, however in the west they'e on opposite sides. I've seen people cast the hackers as immoral because of this aligment. They're "reasoning" that because Saudi Arabia has made the immoral act of infidelity illegal, by exposing the crime, the hackers have acted immorally. It's hilarious to watch rhetorical gymnastics that people are going through to try to occupy the moral high ground.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
