3 ms·

He still has no remorse. Says he'd do again if he could, and that he'd have no problems sending spam right now. I'm not sure if he's an actual sociopath, or if

He still has no remorse. Says he'd do again if he could, and that he'd have no problems sending spam right now. I'm not sure if he's an actual sociopath, or if his ego just demands that he believe that he did nothing wrong and that spam isn't a problem. Either way, people like him make the world we live in worse.

cooldrcool2 3y ago
While spam is annoying, I don’t think it’s at the level of sociopathy.
- swayvil 3y ago
  Spam is definitely bad for society. So if 1 piece of spam is bad then a billion spams is 1B times as bad. That's a big factor. Probably getting near axemurderer levels of social damage. Think about it in terms of years-of-life removed from society. If the average axemurderer removes 10 middleaged (40 years remaining life) people then that's 400 years. If spam eats 1 second that's 31 years. (1B secs) Ok so about 3/40 axemurderer.
  - hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago
    Axemurderers have an expiry (the day they die/are put in prison), spam does not. I think your estimation is grossly underestimated too, Nigerian prince scams trigger (insufferable) workplace discussions which take 5 minutes or longer, for upwards of 5 people, spam that causes people to spend money they otherwise wouldn’t increases the wealth gap, impacting lives for generations.
- autoexec 3y ago
  The financial impact of spam alone is estimated to be tens of billions of dollars annually. There are many non-financial impacts that extend far beyond "annoyance" Spam is annoying the way polluting the ocean or mosquito bites are "annoying". I don't personally see a lot of ocean trash, and nobody I know has ever died from a mosquito bite, but there are massive harms with worldwide impacts caused by both. In my view, the refusal to accept responsibility and the willingness to repeat and continue his offenses without any regard for the harm it causes suggests sociopathy, or at the very least narcissism.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
cowsup 3y ago
Labeling him a sociopath implies that, had he never done it, nobody would have done it. In the article, he mentions that, if he wasn't the first, someone else would've done it in time. I agree with that belief. Directing attention to your business, even without permission, is older than the Internet itself. We've had generations of TV, radio, and newspaper advertisements, as well as stickers placed on lamp posts, flyers in shop windows, or menus placed on doors of homes or hotel rooms. Some advertisement is welcome and paid for, others are done without being caught. But it's all in the name of profit.
- autoexec 3y ago
  labeling a serial killer a sociopath doesn't imply that if they hadn't killed someone nobody else ever would have. It's people who refuse to act responsibly in a community because they have zero regard for the negative impact they have on others that matters here, not which particular asshole would be first to act purely out of selfishness. "Directing attention to your business" isn't a problem either, any more than "setting down your butchers knife" is a problem. It's when, where, and how you do those things that can make it a problem. It's the difference between plunging your butchers knife into your dishwasher, and plunging it into someone else's chest. People can advertise, with or without permission, without polluting the internet and turning their selfish behavior into a multi-billion dollar a year problem for everyone else to clean up.
Frivolous9421 3y ago
[flagged]

cooldrcool2 3y ago

While spam is annoying, I don’t think it’s at the level of sociopathy.

swayvil 3y ago
Spam is definitely bad for society. So if 1 piece of spam is bad then a billion spams is 1B times as bad. That's a big factor. Probably getting near axemurderer levels of social damage. Think about it in terms of years-of-life removed from society. If the average axemurderer removes 10 middleaged (40 years remaining life) people then that's 400 years. If spam eats 1 second that's 31 years. (1B secs) Ok so about 3/40 axemurderer.
- hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago
  Axemurderers have an expiry (the day they die/are put in prison), spam does not. I think your estimation is grossly underestimated too, Nigerian prince scams trigger (insufferable) workplace discussions which take 5 minutes or longer, for upwards of 5 people, spam that causes people to spend money they otherwise wouldn’t increases the wealth gap, impacting lives for generations.
autoexec 3y ago
The financial impact of spam alone is estimated to be tens of billions of dollars annually. There are many non-financial impacts that extend far beyond "annoyance" Spam is annoying the way polluting the ocean or mosquito bites are "annoying". I don't personally see a lot of ocean trash, and nobody I know has ever died from a mosquito bite, but there are massive harms with worldwide impacts caused by both. In my view, the refusal to accept responsibility and the willingness to repeat and continue his offenses without any regard for the harm it causes suggests sociopathy, or at the very least narcissism.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

cowsup 3y ago

Labeling him a sociopath implies that, had he never done it, nobody would have done it. In the article, he mentions that, if he wasn't the first, someone else would've done it in time. I agree with that belief. Directing attention to your business, even without permission, is older than the Internet itself. We've had generations of TV, radio, and newspaper advertisements, as well as stickers placed on lamp posts, flyers in shop windows, or menus placed on doors of homes or hotel rooms. Some advertisement is welcome and paid for, others are done without being caught. But it's all in the name of profit.

autoexec 3y ago
labeling a serial killer a sociopath doesn't imply that if they hadn't killed someone nobody else ever would have. It's people who refuse to act responsibly in a community because they have zero regard for the negative impact they have on others that matters here, not which particular asshole would be first to act purely out of selfishness. "Directing attention to your business" isn't a problem either, any more than "setting down your butchers knife" is a problem. It's when, where, and how you do those things that can make it a problem. It's the difference between plunging your butchers knife into your dishwasher, and plunging it into someone else's chest. People can advertise, with or without permission, without polluting the internet and turning their selfish behavior into a multi-billion dollar a year problem for everyone else to clean up.

Frivolous9421 3y ago

[flagged]