Author Topic: Glitterbomb vs scammers  (Read 4519 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rsjsouzaTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6105
  • Country: us
  • Eternally curious
    • Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico
Glitterbomb vs scammers
« on: March 19, 2021, 11:14:25 am »
I just watched this new video from Mark Rober, the glitterbomb package guy. This time he takes on these bastard scammers. Good job for everyone involved!



Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico http://videos.vbeletronico.com

Oh, the "whys" of the datasheets... The information is there not to be an axiomatic truth, but instead each speck of data must be slowly inhaled while carefully performing a deep search inside oneself to find the true metaphysical sense...
 
The following users thanked this post: Ed.Kloonk, james_s, RJSV

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2021, 02:12:39 pm »

Hehe I love his videos...  lowlifes having a bad day at the 'office'!
 

Offline schmitt trigger

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2431
  • Country: mx
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2021, 03:03:34 pm »
For a service you can actually use, check out the  jollyrogertelephone.com

Some of the examples shown are beyond hilarious.
 

Offline G7PSK

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3889
  • Country: gb
  • It is hot until proved not.
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2021, 03:04:43 pm »
Saw that yesterday,great vidieo pity he can't put semtex in them and get rid of the scammer scum for good.
 
The following users thanked this post: daqq

Offline richard.cs

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1200
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics engineer from Southampton, UK.
    • Random stuff I've built (mostly non-electronic and fairly dated).
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2021, 07:35:54 pm »
Saw that yesterday,great vidieo pity he can't put semtex in them and get rid of the scammer scum for good.
I guess you missed the bit about 1/3 of the way through where a totally innocent person got glittered. Semtex is more... permanent.

Edit:spelling
« Last Edit: March 21, 2021, 07:43:31 pm by richard.cs »
 
The following users thanked this post: nctnico, thm_w, SilverSolder, james_s

Offline thm_w

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7521
  • Country: ca
  • Non-expert
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2021, 09:10:02 pm »
The video is great, but the solution is not going to be awareness.
The telephone system needs a complete overhaul, caller ID is meaningless. Or at the very least some small fee to route calls. Just high enough to discourage scammers from making 500,000 robo calls.
Profile -> Modify profile -> Look and Layout ->  Don't show users' signatures
 
The following users thanked this post: james_s

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8996
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2021, 09:32:07 pm »
I would settle for a caller-ID flag that the number is spoofed.  When I’m uncertain on a missed call, the number is inevitably out of service.
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w

Offline daqq

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
  • Country: sk
    • My site
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2021, 09:56:27 pm »
The video is great, but the solution is not going to be awareness.
The telephone system needs a complete overhaul, caller ID is meaningless. Or at the very least some small fee to route calls. Just high enough to discourage scammers from making 500,000 robo calls.
Yes, an overhaul of the phone and email system might help, but what needs to be mostly overhauled is peoples mentality.

This is just a variation of the problem, scams of various sorts - especially against the elderly - have been around forever. This is just the latest variation, exploiting a mix of good intentions, trying to see the best in people, a misunderstanding of the way the world works these days and a lack of technical knowledge.
A broader solution or at least mitigation is:
- awareness and education to those most at risk
- exemplary punishments to people who do this kind of shit in any way, shape or form

« Last Edit: March 19, 2021, 10:02:43 pm by daqq »
Believe it or not, pointy haired people do exist!
+++Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++
 

Offline Stray Electron

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2253
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2021, 03:22:42 am »
The video is great, but the solution is not going to be awareness.
The telephone system needs a complete overhaul, caller ID is meaningless. Or at the very least some small fee to route calls. Just high enough to discourage scammers from making 500,000 robo calls.

  I disagree, well in part. More than just those actions, the Federal and State authorities need to start treating these scams like any other mafia style organized crime and bust them under the RICO Act, and also starting charging everyone involved with Federal income tax evasion like they did with Al Capone. Al was sentenced to 11 years in Federal prison in 1931 solely for Income Tax Evasion. The first time that a mule got put into Federal Prison for 10+ years it would send a loud and clear message to everyone else in these rackets. Since they're making calls internationally and interstate and the mules are traveling state to state to pick up packages, the Feds would have clear jurisdiction. Wire fraud, banking fraud, money laundering, postal fraud and other Federal charges would also be applicable.
 
The following users thanked this post: daqq, SilverSolder

Offline David Hess

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17427
  • Country: us
  • DavidH
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2021, 12:12:58 pm »
I disagree, well in part. More than just those actions, the Federal and State authorities need to start treating these scams like any other mafia style organized crime and bust them under the RICO Act, and also starting charging everyone involved with Federal income tax evasion like they did with Al Capone. Al was sentenced to 11 years in Federal prison in 1931 solely for Income Tax Evasion. The first time that a mule got put into Federal Prison for 10+ years it would send a loud and clear message to everyone else in these rackets. Since they're making calls internationally and interstate and the mules are traveling state to state to pick up packages, the Feds would have clear jurisdiction. Wire fraud, banking fraud, money laundering, postal fraud and other Federal charges would also be applicable.

Something could be done, but the mules are not making enough to be required to file income tax and the courts lack jurisdiction over the people making the calls who do so outside of the country.  If they are making enough, then they could just file for income tax.
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2021, 05:04:34 pm »

The US government could put pressure on India to clamp down on the scammers on their home turf.
 

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7678
  • Country: ca
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2021, 12:21:28 am »
It's the wrong approach - no country wants another pushing them around. Whether it's fentanyl manufacturing in china, scammers in India or Nigeria, cartels in Mexico.
 

Offline Stray Electron

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2253
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #12 on: March 22, 2021, 03:22:03 am »
[quote author=David Hess link=topic=274214.msg3522882#msg3522882

Something could be done, but the mules are not making enough to be required to file income tax and the courts lack jurisdiction over the people making the calls who do so outside of the country.  If they are making enough, then they could just file for income tax.
[/quote]

   What is the maximum income someone can make before they are required to file an income tax statement in the US? Not before they are required to PAY taxes but to make a written, legal declaration of their income to the IRS.

    Do the math, the mule in the video said that she was making $75 to $100 per package and doing up to seven packages a day. That's at least $525 per day. Even if she only works 100 days of the year that's still $52,500.  And that's on top of any other income that she has. And you also need to consider state, and in some areas, local income tax reporting requirements.

   Actually, curiosity got the better of me so I went and looked and here is the answer:

   "In the year 2018, the maximum earning before paying taxes for a single person under the age of 65 was $12,000."

   "If they are making enough, then they could just file for income tax."

    Yeah, so could drug dealers.  Do you want to make a bet as to how of them report their income to the IRS?
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7334
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #13 on: March 22, 2021, 01:52:18 pm »
It's actually illegal to not declare illegally gained earnings to the IRS.
So if you're dealing illegal drugs and get caught, not only will the courts hang you out to dry, but the IRS will want the taxes legally due, on your illegal income.
And you can't even expense the fines!
 

Offline themadhippy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3264
  • Country: gb
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #14 on: March 22, 2021, 02:13:22 pm »
Quote
It's actually illegal to not declare illegally gained earnings to the IRS.
But if your only income is from illegal activities how can the tax man get paid,as the only money you have is raised from illegal activities ,so the tax man would also be benefiting from illegal activities
 

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2021, 07:29:27 pm »
Quote
It's actually illegal to not declare illegally gained earnings to the IRS.
But if your only income is from illegal activities how can the tax man get paid,as the only money you have is raised from illegal activities ,so the tax man would also be benefiting from illegal activities

Unlike the rest of us, the tax man is allowed to f*k anyone and anything, at any time!  :D
 

Offline David Hess

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17427
  • Country: us
  • DavidH
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2021, 08:28:14 pm »
Yeah, so could drug dealers.  Do you want to make a bet as to how of them report their income to the IRS?

Most do not but they are small time compared to the ones which do.  While illegal income counts as taxable income, there is no requirement to identify that the income is illegal when filing for taxes.  It has to be this way because of the 5th amendment which protects against self incrimination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2021, 09:04:54 pm »
The video is great, but the solution is not going to be awareness.
The telephone system needs a complete overhaul, caller ID is meaningless. Or at the very least some small fee to route calls. Just high enough to discourage scammers from making 500,000 robo calls.

  I disagree, well in part. More than just those actions, the Federal and State authorities need to start treating these scams like any other mafia style organized crime and bust them under the RICO Act, and also starting charging everyone involved with Federal income tax evasion like they did with Al Capone. Al was sentenced to 11 years in Federal prison in 1931 solely for Income Tax Evasion. The first time that a mule got put into Federal Prison for 10+ years it would send a loud and clear message to everyone else in these rackets. Since they're making calls internationally and interstate and the mules are traveling state to state to pick up packages, the Feds would have clear jurisdiction. Wire fraud, banking fraud, money laundering, postal fraud and other Federal charges would also be applicable.

How about we do all these things? No single one of them is going to fix the problem. Caller ID should need to be authenticated to an individual or corporation's true ID, and it should be trivial to block all non-authenticated calls so they don't even ring the phone or go to voicemail. At the same time we could aggressively go after scammers legally.
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w

Offline thm_w

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7521
  • Country: ca
  • Non-expert
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2021, 09:25:49 pm »
Yes, an overhaul of the phone and email system might help, but what needs to be mostly overhauled is peoples mentality.

You aren't going to change 80yr old granny's mentality, their brain is just too old. Its hard enough changing opinions of 30-50 year olds as it is.

  I disagree, well in part. More than just those actions, the Federal and State authorities need to start treating these scams like any other mafia style organized crime and bust them under the RICO Act, and also starting charging everyone involved with Federal income tax evasion like they did with Al Capone. Al was sentenced to 11 years in Federal prison in 1931 solely for Income Tax Evasion. The first time that a mule got put into Federal Prison for 10+ years it would send a loud and clear message to everyone else in these rackets. Since they're making calls internationally and interstate and the mules are traveling state to state to pick up packages, the Feds would have clear jurisdiction. Wire fraud, banking fraud, money laundering, postal fraud and other Federal charges would also be applicable.

Putting someone in federal prison for 10yrs over making $100 is wild. IF they were the ones orchestrating the entire scam, and kept the full $10k+, sure, but they are not. You'll find an endless stream of mules willing to do this kind of work, nothing will happen targeting those kind of people.

I struggle to see how its not exactly the same as targeting low level drug users or dealers. Which seems to be a waste of money to me: "47% of federal prisoners serving time in September 2016 (the most recent date for which data are available) were convicted of a drug offense.". https://d14rmgtrwzf5a.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/drugfacts_nationtrends_6_15.pdf

Profile -> Modify profile -> Look and Layout ->  Don't show users' signatures
 
The following users thanked this post: ve7xen

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #19 on: March 22, 2021, 10:00:06 pm »
Yes, an overhaul of the phone and email system might help, but what needs to be mostly overhauled is peoples mentality.

You aren't going to change 80yr old granny's mentality, their brain is just too old. Its hard enough changing opinions of 30-50 year olds as it is.

  I disagree, well in part. More than just those actions, the Federal and State authorities need to start treating these scams like any other mafia style organized crime and bust them under the RICO Act, and also starting charging everyone involved with Federal income tax evasion like they did with Al Capone. Al was sentenced to 11 years in Federal prison in 1931 solely for Income Tax Evasion. The first time that a mule got put into Federal Prison for 10+ years it would send a loud and clear message to everyone else in these rackets. Since they're making calls internationally and interstate and the mules are traveling state to state to pick up packages, the Feds would have clear jurisdiction. Wire fraud, banking fraud, money laundering, postal fraud and other Federal charges would also be applicable.

Putting someone in federal prison for 10yrs over making $100 is wild. IF they were the ones orchestrating the entire scam, and kept the full $10k+, sure, but they are not. You'll find an endless stream of mules willing to do this kind of work, nothing will happen targeting those kind of people.

I struggle to see how its not exactly the same as targeting low level drug users or dealers. Which seems to be a waste of money to me: "47% of federal prisoners serving time in September 2016 (the most recent date for which data are available) were convicted of a drug offense.". https://d14rmgtrwzf5a.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/drugfacts_nationtrends_6_15.pdf

So what are you going to do...  just let them run loose to sell drugs to your kids?   I can see legalising some drugs is a partial solution (with its own set of problems), but how do you legalise scamming?
 

Offline thm_w

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7521
  • Country: ca
  • Non-expert
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #20 on: March 22, 2021, 10:35:10 pm »
So what are you going to do...  just let them run loose to sell drugs to your kids?   I can see legalising some drugs is a partial solution (with its own set of problems), but how do you legalise scamming?

I wouldn't legalize scamming, no. I don't have a simple solution for you, other than whats been mentioned: reduce calls coming in via technological means.

You could require banks to ask anyone withdrawing more than $10k cash what its for, lecture them about scams. But then "ma freedoms". Not to mention, Walmart/etc store employees are already heavily warning anyone who tries to buy large amounts of iTunes cards, and it rarely has an impact. Although they keep trying: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2020/12/new-toolkit-retailers-help-stop-gift-card-scams
Profile -> Modify profile -> Look and Layout ->  Don't show users' signatures
 
The following users thanked this post: SilverSolder

Offline daqq

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
  • Country: sk
    • My site
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #21 on: March 22, 2021, 10:53:27 pm »
Quote
Putting someone in federal prison for 10yrs over making $100 is wild. IF they were the ones orchestrating the entire scam, and kept the full $10k+, sure, but they are not. You'll find an endless stream of mules willing to do this kind of work, nothing will happen targeting those kind of people.
The alternative to legally persecuting scammers is legally not persecuting scammers. Which is unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. You may as well feed your grandpa to the wolves.
edit: As to nothing happening, well, I disagree. Sure, some people will continue, but many won't.
Quote
I struggle to see how its not exactly the same as targeting low level drug users or dealers.
What's wrong with persecuting drug dealers? They are the scum of the Earth, knowingly causing wholesale misery by means of distributing awful illegal shit.
Quote
I don't have a simple solution for you, other than whats been mentioned: reduce calls coming in via technological means.
Reduction of calls is all well and good, but there are other non-call methods available and commonly done, ranging from simple cons to fairly complex gray areas, where elderly people are not herded, but rather invited to an event and they are not forced to buy the awesome and obscenely expensive set of pots, but surely they only want only what's best for their grandchildren, right? With a paper invite bulk delivered to an old folks house mail box.


I know I may have a simplistic view of the world, but I simply find a vision of the world where my grandma, who's never in her life done anything but be nice to people, will find herself scammed out of her life savings or even her flat due to some dick randomly picking her phone number appalling. I have no sympathy for that sort of scum.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2021, 10:55:26 pm by daqq »
Believe it or not, pointy haired people do exist!
+++Divide By Cucumber Error. Please Reinstall Universe And Reboot +++
 
The following users thanked this post: Stray Electron, SilverSolder

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #22 on: March 23, 2021, 12:47:04 am »

I don't think that suspending the rule of law for anything less than grievous bodily harm is a great idea.   For some people, that just gives them a green light.  Surely we have all met that type at some point?
 

Offline ve7xen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1195
  • Country: ca
    • VE7XEN Blog
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #23 on: March 23, 2021, 01:14:11 am »
The alternative to legally persecuting scammers is legally not persecuting scammers. Which is unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. You may as well feed your grandpa to the wolves.
edit: As to nothing happening, well, I disagree. Sure, some people will continue, but many won't.

I think the question is really whether to arrest them immediately and throw them in jail, which will just have the scammer move on to the next desperate mule but the return of a couple victims' money, or allow the crime to occur in the hopes of catching someone higher up and having a much greater positive impact on victims overall. The former will have little impact on the scammers as a whole, but put a bunch of low-level employees who know nothing into probation on petty sentences. The latter requires hard police work and the acceptance that you'll need to let some crime slide in the hopes of catching the bigger fish, which might ultimately fail.

See HBOs The Wire.

Quote
What's wrong with persecuting drug dealers? They are the scum of the Earth, knowingly causing wholesale misery by means of distributing awful illegal shit.

The problem is targeting low level drug dealers, who have virtually no connection to the organization and are more or less disposable. You inflate the prison population while having effectively zero effect on the availability of drugs or the profit of drug dealers. Similar situation here. The mules are disposable and don't know enough about the organization to be a problem for them. Arresting them will have very little impact.

With these scammers, the cross-jurisdictional nature doesn't help, nor does the anonymity on the Internet that the scammers themselves enjoy. It's a pretty intractable problem, IMO, but arresting the mules isn't going to be an effective counter.

Scams have been around since the dawn of commerce, and naive old folks have been taken advantage of for approximately as long. There's not much point in wasting resources on counter strategies that are unlikely to be effective, IMO.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2021, 01:15:52 am by ve7xen »
73 de VE7XEN
He/Him
 

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: Glitterbomb vs scammers
« Reply #24 on: March 23, 2021, 04:16:25 am »
The alternative to legally persecuting scammers is legally not persecuting scammers. Which is unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. You may as well feed your grandpa to the wolves.
edit: As to nothing happening, well, I disagree. Sure, some people will continue, but many won't.

I think the question is really whether to arrest them immediately and throw them in jail, which will just have the scammer move on to the next desperate mule but the return of a couple victims' money, or allow the crime to occur in the hopes of catching someone higher up and having a much greater positive impact on victims overall. The former will have little impact on the scammers as a whole, but put a bunch of low-level employees who know nothing into probation on petty sentences. The latter requires hard police work and the acceptance that you'll need to let some crime slide in the hopes of catching the bigger fish, which might ultimately fail.

See HBOs The Wire.

Quote
What's wrong with persecuting drug dealers? They are the scum of the Earth, knowingly causing wholesale misery by means of distributing awful illegal shit.

The problem is targeting low level drug dealers, who have virtually no connection to the organization and are more or less disposable. You inflate the prison population while having effectively zero effect on the availability of drugs or the profit of drug dealers. Similar situation here. The mules are disposable and don't know enough about the organization to be a problem for them. Arresting them will have very little impact.

With these scammers, the cross-jurisdictional nature doesn't help, nor does the anonymity on the Internet that the scammers themselves enjoy. It's a pretty intractable problem, IMO, but arresting the mules isn't going to be an effective counter.

Scams have been around since the dawn of commerce, and naive old folks have been taken advantage of for approximately as long. There's not much point in wasting resources on counter strategies that are unlikely to be effective, IMO.

Are you saying "natural justice" is the way to go?  That's the kind of thing that leads people to take the law into their own hands...   I know of instances where miscreants were given rough justice because the "victim" didn't think it worth wasting time making police complaints, and preferred dealing with the problem in a more, ahem, direct fashion...  -  you get enough people thinking like that, and pretty soon you'll have your country ruled by the Mafia, who will take care of injustices in their own inimitable way.... 
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf