3 ms·

I don't see any mistake. > Small platforms have way less fraud because they are way less valuable to exploit, in general. Yes. > The big platforms actually a

I don't see any mistake. > Small platforms have way less fraud because they are way less valuable to exploit, in general. Yes. > The big platforms actually are radically more competent at anti-fraud / anti-spam / etc, but the scope of their operations make them such juicy targets that there is a lot of it anyways. If their business model (scale above everything) results in shitty customer experience I don't really care how competent they are. They are fighting the problem they created themselves: a platform too valuable for scammers.

8note 3y ago
> If their business model (scale above everything) results in shitty customer experience I don't really care how competent they are. It's a tradeoff. If your customer service is good such that more people shop there, there will be more fraud attempts overall. It's not that a platform is too valuable for scammers, it's that a platforms is valuable at all. All platform value is value for scammers, and the most useful platform will also have the most scammers on it
- alexey-salmin 3y ago
  This is like saying that everything (including scam attempts) is proportional to the scale so the scale doesn't really matter. It's not true. Scale bring synergy and reduces costs. But it's a two-way road which works for scams too: scamming one big platform and fighting one anti-fraud system is ten times more cost-efficient than adjusting to ten smaller ones.