Tell me about common cons/scams: "Thanks, you suck. Hello, this is Linda."

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Tell me about common cons/scams: "Thanks, you suck. Hello, this is Linda."

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

Don't be so hard on them. Clearly the name of this website is misleading and they just got suckered in.

# ¿ Jun 10, 2021 14:52

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 01:38

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

So it's a scam in that they won't even attempt to kill you, right?

# ¿ Oct 29, 2021 18:29

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

namlosh posted:

I’m on mobile so I can’t quote quotes very easily… but am I to understand that these scammers are somehow able to change google’s streetview data????

The article mentions seeing a pink building on streetview and then when they went to the address it wasn’t actually there?? Was the building demolished and the scammers knew that somehow? Well that is crazy.

I guess use Apple Maps or bing maps or something and cross reference. I’m not saying don’t get a referral from a friend… just think you could detect who’s real or not using only sleuthing

The article calls it a street-view image. As in, more than likely, a maliciously user added image of a view of a (different) street. Which is some needlessly confusing language.

If they had actually checked streetview, as in the google product that is part of maps, the building wouldn't have been there, obviously.

# ¿ Aug 8, 2022 22:10

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

Isn't it a thing that a user uploaded content platform like YouTube can't be held responsible for the content on it as long as it's all automated and they do a best effort of reacting to complaints? I thought it was like that for copyright violations at least. I forget what the law or case was called where that was decided. Maybe having YouTube kids proactively curated/moderated by actual people opens them up to all sorts of liability. Like they couldn't just check if it was kid friendly, they'd have to actually check everything was on the up and up legally and properly cleared. Something like that. The required amount of effort would quickly get out of hand.

Idk, maybe this is just nonsense fabricated by my aching brain.

# ¿ Aug 23, 2022 14:08

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

Volmarias posted:

You might be thinking of the DMCA. They actually have a separate agreement with the entertainment industry where they get to just take things down (hence the "copyright strikes") and in return they don't cause a tremendous legal headache, but this agreement isn't a law.

I was thinking of Section 230, which is broader. DMCA is a law, that was easily googled.

Scanning through the Section 230 Wikipedia page doesn't really clear up for me if proactive, human moderation would make a platform liable for (illegal) content on it. The page does have a concise summary of Directive 2000/31/EC, the EU equivalent, that states that hosting providers are not responsible for the content they host as long as (1) the acts in question are neutral intermediary acts of a mere technical, automatic and passive capacity; (2) they are not informed of its illegal character, and (3) they act promptly to remove or disable access to the material when informed of it. To me that sounds like a manually whitelisted YouTube kids might be considered not passive, automatic or merely technical enough to remain covered by EU law. Otoh, is it a separate platform, or is it just a part of YouTube as a whole? Is it different from a YouTube endorsed playlist with recommendations? Etc. I don't know these things.

Anyway, mostly just happy that I was able to find the name of what I was thinking of. I just noticed this isn't really thread topic adjacent, so never mind.

# ¿ Aug 24, 2022 11:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 01:38

Flipperwaldt: Nov 11, 2011; Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?

I don't quite get it, it says three different ways that you've already paid it and spells out not to pay again. Are they looking for people to identify themselves as marks by disputing it? Creating a trail of credibility to bill them more later?

# ¿ Sep 19, 2023 18:25

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Tell me about common cons/scams: "Thanks, you suck. Hello, this is Linda."