Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 940 posts

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#171

Post by AstralStorm »

vorpalhex wrote: post #140
MagicPropmaker wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California, thefts of under $950 are not felony crimes. And there's no more "three strikes". So you can steal packages for a living and, at worst, have to spend a week or two in jail over the course of a year. Not a bad living.

If I paid you $200, would you spend two weeks in jail? If getting that $200 meant risk to you (someone confronting you, someone else taking your money, risk of an officer giving you a beat down), would you still take it? It doesn't take a lot of risk to offset the "value" of stealing $950 labeled-worth goods (which will net you <$250 in cash).

Don't worry about the petty thief, they are smart enough about minimizing their own risk.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#173

Post by rdtsc »

This needs careful consideration if you ever decide to do it. Depending on the local criminal culture they could exact revenge. Then also know where you live and can do a lot worse things than taking a package. Police might later be involved but it might not be worth it. You are dealing with people who have no qualms stealing so it's not too crazy to expect other rash and illegal acts from them.

I can also see some intrepid crooks suing for glitter damaging their eyesight permanently or some other bullshit claim. Some attorney or DA might decide to get free publicity and see if they can swing a "injured by booby trap" case.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#174

Post by berdon »

subcosmos wrote: post #158
kaivi wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had the same thought when I first saw it. Some suspicious things: thieves talking to themselves, that lady throwing the box into her own garbage bin, zero attempt at disassembly or closer inspection of the box, no police involved. Also GPS is just not that good for locating anything of that size in given circumstances, and it would not have worked in the parking garage. Too many things could have gone wrong here…

Let's be clear, it's most definitely not GPS. Most phones these days use Wi-Fi location tracking for the fine-precision it offers.

It most definitely is GPS _and_ Wi-Fi SSN triangulation.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#175

Post by bsamuels »

kaivi wrote: post #101
cosmotron wrote: post #73

What are people's thoughts on if this is staged? Considering the views / subscriptions are the main motivation here, it might justify the expenses poured into this project – that is, it would be quite a waste if all that effort went into the build just to have no one actually take it off the porch. If actors were used, it would explain the lack of police involvement (it's easy to say, "police weren't interested" ). A…

I've had the same thought when I first saw it. Some suspicious things: thieves talking to themselves, that lady throwing the box into her own garbage bin, zero attempt at disassembly or closer inspection of the box, no police involved. Also GPS is just not that good for locating anything of that size in given circumstances, and it would not have worked in the parking garage. Too many things could have gone wrong here…

> The design is subpar in my opinion

Are you a mechanical/electrical engineer? Not trying to be hostile, but what would you have improved?

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#176

Post by dvtrn »

VectorLock wrote: post #162
cosmotron wrote: post #73

What are people's thoughts on if this is staged? Considering the views / subscriptions are the main motivation here, it might justify the expenses poured into this project – that is, it would be quite a waste if all that effort went into the build just to have no one actually take it off the porch. If actors were used, it would explain the lack of police involvement (it's easy to say, "police weren't interested" ). A…

It would be funny if this spawned a bunch of copy cats which then drives down the incidents of package theft because thiefs are paranoid of getting prank packages. I bet somebody will soon start selling this as a product. And people will just send them to their friends instead of targeting package thiefs. "Pranked you bro!" Then there will be a bunch of backlash.

>And people will just send them to their friends instead of targeting package thiefs. "Pranked you bro!"

No need to wait for that, it's already a thing:

https://www.ruindays.com/

Some have sent far...erm...shittier things in the mail:

http://time.com/3634443/cards-against-humanity-poop-black-fr...

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#177

Post by modzu »

cosmotron wrote: post #73

What are people's thoughts on if this is staged? Considering the views / subscriptions are the main motivation here, it might justify the expenses poured into this project – that is, it would be quite a waste if all that effort went into the build just to have no one actually take it off the porch. If actors were used, it would explain the lack of police involvement (it's easy to say, "police weren't interested" ). A…

it would be cool to see the source for the project, like what triggered the cloud uploads or how the gps data was mapped

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#178

Post by duiker101 »

themoat wrote: post #166
slig wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be worried as well. Even if the criminals didn't remember where they got the package, now the video is going viral and it looks like the shows his home address on a map. Edit: as someone pointed out it's not his address. I just re-watched the video and it's written on the map that it's not actually his house address.

I cannot believe I know this...but the location on the map is actually the McCallister's house from Home Alone, in Illinois, Mark lives in California. I looked it up a few months ago...and I recognized the google map as soon as it popped up on the video. https://goo.gl/maps/1sytkJCxFqn

He mentions that he used that address on the package too.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#179

Post by Someone1234 »

adrr wrote: post #159
mcv wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Given the police's complete inaction vigilantism was inevitable. This makes me wonder: who is responsible for the lost package? I would expect, if the deliverer can't prove they delivered the package (because they didn't get a signature), they're responsible for the loss and need to pay for the loss. The recipient certainly can't help that someone left a package outside. If the loss is for the recipient, then I can…

The delivery company sometimes takes pictures of the package left at the door. The customer is ultimately responsible for the package, not the shipper. It's the customer who files the police report.

Anyone can file a police report.

The sender and the sender's agent (shipping company) own the package until it is delivered. That's why the sender insures it and insurance payments go to the sender.

But often it is more complicated than that, because there's a commercial contract between the sender and the recipient that also has to be taken into account.

I'd call it a legally grey area, with the commercial sender often likely filing an insurance claim and re-sending the lost merchandise.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#180

Post by Guest10928391 »

weberc2 wrote: post #99
txcwpalpha wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noone said anything about sympathy. And lack of sympathy is irrelevant to legal liability.

Ok, let me spell it out: that the law protects criminals and punishes innocent citizens in such cases is indicative of a problem with the law. And yes, defending your property from theft is categorically "innocent".

Booby traps are not "innocent". What happens if you stop responding and paramedics are sent to your property? They get paintballed because they approached your porch at night when there should have been no visitors?

What happens if you put a car airbag in a booby trapped package, and someone steals the package and brings it home. Then later that day their child or spouse finds and opens the package not realizing it was stolen. Boooom, an airbag in their face and they're seriously injured.

We don't need a world where we're surrounded by booby traps. It's a disaster waiting to happen because there are countless edge cases that people wouldn't consider.

We're quickly moving towards a future with door bell cameras and facial recognition software. We also have more parcel lockers showing up in different cities and neighborhoods where you can have packages safely delivered, available for pickup 24/7. These are better alternatives than setting traps.

Post reply on HN