6 ms·

vigilantism can spiral out of control. While it makes sense in this scenario, it's because the scammer is obviously breaking some law and is criminal. What happ

by chii 2y ago

vigilantism can spiral out of control. While it makes sense in this scenario, it's because the scammer is obviously breaking some law and is criminal. What happens if it wasn't so obvious?

newsclues 2y ago
I’m fine with a war on scammers getting out of control to the point where bombs are being dropped on scammers call centres. They are the modern Hostis humani generis
- cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
  Really, really sounds like you don’t have many real problems in your life and don’t know who to blame for societal issues. People here will lament about the exploited H1Bs causing literal genocides at Meta until the cows come home, but literally other any person working a job they don’t necessarily like and in a living situation that’s undoubtedly worse deserve to be literally bombed because they sent you a text message. Jesus Christ.
  - dumpsterdiver 2y ago
    Do you… know what the word literally means?
- cutemonster 2y ago
  Seems you didn't know that lots of people in scam call centers aren't there voluntarily. Trafficking and threats > ... lured to countries through fake job adverts but are instead forced to work in scam call centers, pushing cryptocurrency investments, as well as work-from-home, lottery, romance, and online gambling scams. All this, while being subject to "abject abuse." > A report from Interpol from earlier this year said victims are also subjected to extortion via debt bondage, beatings, sexual exploitation ... https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/08/human_trafficking_for_cyber_scam/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/08/human_trafficking_for... and: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/hundreds-thousands-trafficked-into-se-asia-scam-centres-un-2023-08-29/ https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/hundreds-thousand...
  - ben_w 2y ago
    Mm. For what it's worth, I can get them to hang up immediately if I recommend they join a trade union.
    - mnw21cam 2y ago
      People who are the victims in a controlling relationship will usually say things that the controller wants them to say, even when the controller is not there. Ask me how I know.
      - ben_w 2y ago
        I can well believe it, and my sympathies to you. Hopefully the suggestion gave them an idea to reflect on later — I don't know of anything better that can be done when on the receiving end of a phone call.
        mnw21cam 2y ago
        I think you're probably right. I came to the opinion a while ago that one of the very best things you can do to help someone who is a victim of a controlling relationship is to tell them things that are indisputably true in such a way that they can ignore you if they aren't ready to hear it or are unable to respond, but so that their mind will have something to chew on and slowly form the roots of a rediscovery of truth.
        lo_zamoyski 2y ago
        This is what I did with a scammer. He kept rationalizing his theft, claiming he's just taking "a little" from many people who are well off and wouldn't miss it. Of course, not only is that bullshit, but it wouldn't justify the theft even if it were true. I appealed to his conscience, sternly, and didn't give him an inch. I ended the conversation by wishing that he will come to renounce his evil ways. The very fact that he didn't hangup, that he felt he had to explain away his guilt to me (a few times) shows that he himself wasn't convinced of his rationalization and that he himself believed he was doing something wrong. I can only hope that the guilt gnawed its way into his conscious and that the worm that never dies led him to rethink his life and to pick up some honest work. May the guilty lose sleep, and may their ill-gotten goods taste of ash, and thus be led to remorse and reform and the righteous path. This is love of neighbor.
- ben_w 2y ago
  chii wrote: "What happens if it wasn't so obvious?" Is Musk a scammer? Bitcoin? The commission Apple charges on the App Store? The Fortnight monetisation system? Facebook's claim to be able to accurately target adverts? Vaccines and masks? OpenAI? People on this website have said so about each of those examples. That is why it's bad to go down that path.
  - throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
    To answer your question, No they aren't. Until the REAL scammers are brought down, people will take actions into their own hands.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question If the question's answer was obvious and resolving false then none would have been described thusly, if it was obvious and resolving true then you wouldn't be denying it. Merely asserting that they are not, in your opinion (though hey, look at those legal cases they have between them…) does nothing to remove the fact that they have been called this. It also does nothing to help with the lack of legitimacy of vigilantes. Nor, in this case, jurisdiction: part of the problem here is international cooperation, because right now the USA (where the victim is) and China (where the gang is) are a bit chilly towards each other. > people will take actions into their own hands. Amateurs sending a bomb their way? That's one way to describe how WW1 started.
    - bigallen 2y ago
      I think the point they’re trying to make is that determining who is a criminal and what kind of punishment they deserve is a very difficult task that depends largely on perspective.
  - danaris 2y ago
    The existence of a gray area in between "obviously fine" and "obviously wrong" doesn't mean that there is nothing in those outer categories. It is, at least hypothetically, possible to define "scammer" clearly enough that the more egregious and clear-cut types are taken care of more expeditiously. Not sure if there's a way to actually enforce that better, but "it is possible to disagree over whether some things are scams" is not the same as "there's no way to agree on whether anything is a scam".
- _heimdall 2y ago
  You have never seen war first hand if you would be fine with starting a war over online scammers.
  - newsclues 2y ago
    Maybe I have and the calls aggravated my ptsd?
themaninthedark 2y ago
If society doesn't want vigilantes than it must take an active role in pursuing and punishing criminals.
- prmoustache 2y ago
  You are saying it as if there was only one society with one juridiction.
  - capnsalty 2y ago
    [flagged]
- _heimdall 2y ago
  At least here in the US, I can say one of the last things we need is more people in jail or prison.
  - justin_oaks 2y ago
    The parent commenter said "pursue and punish", not "put in jail". There are other forms of punishment besides jail time. But really I'm more concerned that the scam organization is shut down, even if the main scammer isn't put behind bars. If nothing else, it'll slow down and reduce the scams.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Fair enough. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but at least in the US you will almost certainly spend a bit of time in a jail when being charged, booked, and arraigned. Given that we're talking about legal, rather than extra judicial, pursuit and punishment I would expect jail to be a part of that process.
  - capnsalty 2y ago
    We just need different people in jail. Release all the people who got caught with dime bags and lock up the people who steal money from seniors. Those are the actual monsters.
vouaobrasil 2y ago
Then society would quickly condemn the vigilantes. Vigilantism works precisely in those cases where the criminals being persecuted is obvious. It seems to me that there is an optimal amount of vigilantism and it's greater than zero in those rare cases where there is a person skilled enough to carry out the retribution.
nonrandomstring 2y ago
If we're going to invoke "vigilantism" (as opposed to notions of reasonable and proportionate self-defence) let's acknowledge how U.S. American culture at least in the 80s and 90s is drenched in a deep love of vigilante justice... The A-Team, Knight Rider, The Equaliser, even Batman! Who doesn't dream of a secret base inside a mountain, filled with surveillance gear, an anti-crime computer and a personal Apache attack helicopter waiting on the pad to rain fire down on miscreants? Let's say that's more than just individual morality but a concrete cultural relation to wealth, power, justice and social contract of the state.
- lo_zamoyski 2y ago
  The trouble with vigilatism is that it involves a usurpation of state authority that one does not possess. State authority can be deputized under certain conditions, of course, and self-defense is an example (I can shoot someone trying to commit murder, for example; or consider citizen's arrest), but it isn't arbitrary and isn't vigilatism. Of course, when the state demonstrates a dereliction of duty and becomes feckless in its ability to punish criminals in proportion to their crimes, this creates outrage and a strong temptation to engage in vigilatism. The state then shares responsibility for the resulting vigilatism.
  - nonrandomstring 2y ago
    I agree, and think there are many facets of degeneration that lead people to disrespect the law and see justice as something they must provision for themselves; Surveillance cameras and drones instead of police in the streets. Algorithms and predictive policing instead of presence - ears to the ground and forward intelligence. Procedural and summary justice in place of juries and deliberation. Police who are uneducated in, and frequently break the law. Delegation to untrusted private power without democratic mandate... All of these things give people a sense they have been abandoned by a derelict state and must meet violence with violence, power with power. That's profitable for an "insecurity industry" that thrives on fear, but devastating to societal wellbeing.
edm0nd 2y ago
I mean scammers are the perfect targets to hack because they cant go to the police lol I have no issues with hackers hacking scammers and fucking their shit up.

by chii 2y ago

vigilantism can spiral out of control. While it makes sense in this scenario, it's because the scammer is obviously breaking some law and is criminal. What happens if it wasn't so obvious?

newsclues 2y ago

I’m fine with a war on scammers getting out of control to the point where bombs are being dropped on scammers call centres. They are the modern Hostis humani generis

cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
Really, really sounds like you don’t have many real problems in your life and don’t know who to blame for societal issues. People here will lament about the exploited H1Bs causing literal genocides at Meta until the cows come home, but literally other any person working a job they don’t necessarily like and in a living situation that’s undoubtedly worse deserve to be literally bombed because they sent you a text message. Jesus Christ.
- dumpsterdiver 2y ago
  Do you… know what the word literally means?
cutemonster 2y ago
Seems you didn't know that lots of people in scam call centers aren't there voluntarily. Trafficking and threats > ... lured to countries through fake job adverts but are instead forced to work in scam call centers, pushing cryptocurrency investments, as well as work-from-home, lottery, romance, and online gambling scams. All this, while being subject to "abject abuse." > A report from Interpol from earlier this year said victims are also subjected to extortion via debt bondage, beatings, sexual exploitation ... https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/08/human_trafficking_for_cyber_scam/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/08/human_trafficking_for... and: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/hundreds-thousands-trafficked-into-se-asia-scam-centres-un-2023-08-29/ https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/hundreds-thousand...
- ben_w 2y ago
  Mm. For what it's worth, I can get them to hang up immediately if I recommend they join a trade union.
  - mnw21cam 2y ago
    People who are the victims in a controlling relationship will usually say things that the controller wants them to say, even when the controller is not there. Ask me how I know.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      I can well believe it, and my sympathies to you. Hopefully the suggestion gave them an idea to reflect on later — I don't know of anything better that can be done when on the receiving end of a phone call.
      - mnw21cam 2y ago
        I think you're probably right. I came to the opinion a while ago that one of the very best things you can do to help someone who is a victim of a controlling relationship is to tell them things that are indisputably true in such a way that they can ignore you if they aren't ready to hear it or are unable to respond, but so that their mind will have something to chew on and slowly form the roots of a rediscovery of truth.
        lo_zamoyski 2y ago
        This is what I did with a scammer. He kept rationalizing his theft, claiming he's just taking "a little" from many people who are well off and wouldn't miss it. Of course, not only is that bullshit, but it wouldn't justify the theft even if it were true. I appealed to his conscience, sternly, and didn't give him an inch. I ended the conversation by wishing that he will come to renounce his evil ways. The very fact that he didn't hangup, that he felt he had to explain away his guilt to me (a few times) shows that he himself wasn't convinced of his rationalization and that he himself believed he was doing something wrong. I can only hope that the guilt gnawed its way into his conscious and that the worm that never dies led him to rethink his life and to pick up some honest work. May the guilty lose sleep, and may their ill-gotten goods taste of ash, and thus be led to remorse and reform and the righteous path. This is love of neighbor.
ben_w 2y ago
chii wrote: "What happens if it wasn't so obvious?" Is Musk a scammer? Bitcoin? The commission Apple charges on the App Store? The Fortnight monetisation system? Facebook's claim to be able to accurately target adverts? Vaccines and masks? OpenAI? People on this website have said so about each of those examples. That is why it's bad to go down that path.
- throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
  To answer your question, No they aren't. Until the REAL scammers are brought down, people will take actions into their own hands.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question If the question's answer was obvious and resolving false then none would have been described thusly, if it was obvious and resolving true then you wouldn't be denying it. Merely asserting that they are not, in your opinion (though hey, look at those legal cases they have between them…) does nothing to remove the fact that they have been called this. It also does nothing to help with the lack of legitimacy of vigilantes. Nor, in this case, jurisdiction: part of the problem here is international cooperation, because right now the USA (where the victim is) and China (where the gang is) are a bit chilly towards each other. > people will take actions into their own hands. Amateurs sending a bomb their way? That's one way to describe how WW1 started.
  - bigallen 2y ago
    I think the point they’re trying to make is that determining who is a criminal and what kind of punishment they deserve is a very difficult task that depends largely on perspective.
- danaris 2y ago
  The existence of a gray area in between "obviously fine" and "obviously wrong" doesn't mean that there is nothing in those outer categories. It is, at least hypothetically, possible to define "scammer" clearly enough that the more egregious and clear-cut types are taken care of more expeditiously. Not sure if there's a way to actually enforce that better, but "it is possible to disagree over whether some things are scams" is not the same as "there's no way to agree on whether anything is a scam".
_heimdall 2y ago
You have never seen war first hand if you would be fine with starting a war over online scammers.
- newsclues 2y ago
  Maybe I have and the calls aggravated my ptsd?

themaninthedark 2y ago

If society doesn't want vigilantes than it must take an active role in pursuing and punishing criminals.

prmoustache 2y ago
You are saying it as if there was only one society with one juridiction.
- capnsalty 2y ago
  [flagged]
_heimdall 2y ago
At least here in the US, I can say one of the last things we need is more people in jail or prison.
- justin_oaks 2y ago
  The parent commenter said "pursue and punish", not "put in jail". There are other forms of punishment besides jail time. But really I'm more concerned that the scam organization is shut down, even if the main scammer isn't put behind bars. If nothing else, it'll slow down and reduce the scams.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Fair enough. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but at least in the US you will almost certainly spend a bit of time in a jail when being charged, booked, and arraigned. Given that we're talking about legal, rather than extra judicial, pursuit and punishment I would expect jail to be a part of that process.
- capnsalty 2y ago
  We just need different people in jail. Release all the people who got caught with dime bags and lock up the people who steal money from seniors. Those are the actual monsters.

vouaobrasil 2y ago

Then society would quickly condemn the vigilantes. Vigilantism works precisely in those cases where the criminals being persecuted is obvious. It seems to me that there is an optimal amount of vigilantism and it's greater than zero in those rare cases where there is a person skilled enough to carry out the retribution.

nonrandomstring 2y ago

If we're going to invoke "vigilantism" (as opposed to notions of reasonable and proportionate self-defence) let's acknowledge how U.S. American culture at least in the 80s and 90s is drenched in a deep love of vigilante justice... The A-Team, Knight Rider, The Equaliser, even Batman! Who doesn't dream of a secret base inside a mountain, filled with surveillance gear, an anti-crime computer and a personal Apache attack helicopter waiting on the pad to rain fire down on miscreants? Let's say that's more than just individual morality but a concrete cultural relation to wealth, power, justice and social contract of the state.

lo_zamoyski 2y ago
The trouble with vigilatism is that it involves a usurpation of state authority that one does not possess. State authority can be deputized under certain conditions, of course, and self-defense is an example (I can shoot someone trying to commit murder, for example; or consider citizen's arrest), but it isn't arbitrary and isn't vigilatism. Of course, when the state demonstrates a dereliction of duty and becomes feckless in its ability to punish criminals in proportion to their crimes, this creates outrage and a strong temptation to engage in vigilatism. The state then shares responsibility for the resulting vigilatism.
- nonrandomstring 2y ago
  I agree, and think there are many facets of degeneration that lead people to disrespect the law and see justice as something they must provision for themselves; Surveillance cameras and drones instead of police in the streets. Algorithms and predictive policing instead of presence - ears to the ground and forward intelligence. Procedural and summary justice in place of juries and deliberation. Police who are uneducated in, and frequently break the law. Delegation to untrusted private power without democratic mandate... All of these things give people a sense they have been abandoned by a derelict state and must meet violence with violence, power with power. That's profitable for an "insecurity industry" that thrives on fear, but devastating to societal wellbeing.

edm0nd 2y ago

I mean scammers are the perfect targets to hack because they cant go to the police lol I have no issues with hackers hacking scammers and fucking their shit up.