3 ms·

> So far "nigerian email spam" was easy to recognize. Grammar mistakes, bad translation, very bad wording... But now every fringe group, can generate gigabytes

> So far "nigerian email spam" was easy to recognize. Grammar mistakes, bad translation, very bad wording... But now every fringe group, can generate gigabytes of text and arguments that make sense! "nigerian email spam" contains grammar mistakes, bad translation, vary bad wording... by design. To weed out those unlikely to end up sending money. I don't know how you can make an argument that makes sense about being chosen by royalty of a country to help them in some way.

Thoeu388 3y ago
[dead]
- version_five 3y ago
  They've been replaced with fashion mistakes
- rsynnott 3y ago
  If someone is running an actual 419 scam in crypto, probably yes; they only want the really easy marks (because there's a non-zero incremental cost to each person engaging so they only want the ones who are likely to convert). Most crypto scams are either pump and dump schemes or some sort of Ponzi, though, and for those it really doesn't matter; there's no incentive to cut the number of participants.
notahacker 3y ago
> "nigerian email spam" contains grammar mistakes, bad translation, vary bad wording... by design. To weed out those unlikely to end up sending money this theory is popular, but ignores the simple fact that mostly it weeds out the 90% of people whose email provider offers spam filters which are entirely uncorrelated with gullibility, as well as how low-risk, high reward email exchanges with the tiny fraction of people that bother to reply are to anonymous scammers in faraway low income countries. I agree LLMs aren't that helpful though: the better scammers are able to generate leads even more easily through copy/pasting other people's classified ads or genuine business enquiries. And yes, having fooled a relatively smart person with someone else's prose into sincere interest in doing business with them, they then reply with poor English, unsettling disinterest in anything other than the money and repeatedly reassuring you it's safe, and a payment proposal that makes no sense (not as a filtering technique but because that's the best they can do). LLMs only solve the first bit.
- Thoeu388 3y ago
  > mostly it weeds out the 90% of people whose email provider offers spam filters Do you thing it weeds out 90% of politicians who talk total gibberish? At end, it will enforce people who are in your social network. Some random celebrity will be ignored. Dude who lives 1 km from your location will be boosted.
copperx 3y ago
It's amusing to see this popular "by design" explanation take hold with no evidence whatsoever.

Thoeu388 3y ago

[dead]

version_five 3y ago
They've been replaced with fashion mistakes
rsynnott 3y ago
If someone is running an actual 419 scam in crypto, probably yes; they only want the really easy marks (because there's a non-zero incremental cost to each person engaging so they only want the ones who are likely to convert). Most crypto scams are either pump and dump schemes or some sort of Ponzi, though, and for those it really doesn't matter; there's no incentive to cut the number of participants.

notahacker 3y ago

> "nigerian email spam" contains grammar mistakes, bad translation, vary bad wording... by design. To weed out those unlikely to end up sending money this theory is popular, but ignores the simple fact that mostly it weeds out the 90% of people whose email provider offers spam filters which are entirely uncorrelated with gullibility, as well as how low-risk, high reward email exchanges with the tiny fraction of people that bother to reply are to anonymous scammers in faraway low income countries. I agree LLMs aren't that helpful though: the better scammers are able to generate leads even more easily through copy/pasting other people's classified ads or genuine business enquiries. And yes, having fooled a relatively smart person with someone else's prose into sincere interest in doing business with them, they then reply with poor English, unsettling disinterest in anything other than the money and repeatedly reassuring you it's safe, and a payment proposal that makes no sense (not as a filtering technique but because that's the best they can do). LLMs only solve the first bit.

Thoeu388 3y ago
> mostly it weeds out the 90% of people whose email provider offers spam filters Do you thing it weeds out 90% of politicians who talk total gibberish? At end, it will enforce people who are in your social network. Some random celebrity will be ignored. Dude who lives 1 km from your location will be boosted.

copperx 3y ago

It's amusing to see this popular "by design" explanation take hold with no evidence whatsoever.