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

Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

news.virginmediao2.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 277 posts

Re: Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

#231

Post by spacebanana7 »

akoboldfrying wrote: post #207
EasyMark wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll take my chances. 99%of the people I want to talk to either email/text me first or are already in my contacts list (which I’m not really all that picky about). I’ll accept that failure rate.

Isn't "emailing you first" just kicking the can down the road? What stops spam emails getting through to you? (Besides the exact kind of heuristic filtering you seem to be objecting to, that is.)

Email spam filters have the advantage of being able to see the content of the message, so hopefully they're more accurate.

The disadvantage of email is that it doesn't work for urgent use cases, like Disneyland calling the parent of a lost child.

Re: Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

#234

Post by throwaway313374 »

bityard wrote: post #100
brap wrote: post #89

This reminds me of “shadow banning” - instead of letting the misbehaving user know they’ve been banned, and let them find a way around it, you make them believe they’re not banned and let them waste their time interacting with the system (without actually interacting with others), this makes them spend less time on actual misuse and it makes the penalty for it more expensive. Good strategy. Cruel too. So I don’t thin…

No doubt it has been misused at some point or another, but shadow banning in the context of online communities is generally a last-resort defense against the very worst and most prolific trolls. Not someone who accidentally breaks forum etiquette one time. A person who is shadow banned generally continues their antisocial behavior in the face of multiple warnings and reprimands. I don't see it as cruel. I see it as d…

Is it effective at all though?

It's very easy to check if your posts are available by browsing them anonymously or under a second account.

Re: Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

#235

Post by swores »

plagiarist wrote: post #156
swores wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a great solution to the minority of people like you and me who wouldn't mind the added steps of approving every real phone call as not spam after, having to remember how to set that you're expecting a call from a random number, etc. I can't see it being acceptable to enough people for any network to go down this road unless spam levels get way worse.

Reporting spam should be the other way around, it defaults to assuming a normal interaction. Consider: if you get harassed with a call or text you don't like, you send an SMS with that phone number to some known short code. You then receive $1 from the caller. If the caller cannot be found, the last verifiable link in the chain is responsible for paying the fine. This would cause carriers to behave overnight, instead…

That sounds a lot better to me

Re: Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

#237

Post by alecco »

arethuza wrote: post #236

What I find amusing is that scammers have my phone number but my wife's name - so I get random calls where they say "Can I speak to Ms Arethuza" and I say "No" and end the call.

Weird. AFAIK nowadays the contacts are bought from lists out of online orders where your name is there. Do you shop in your wife's name?

Re: Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

#238

Post by arethuza »

alecco wrote: post #237
arethuza wrote: post #236

What I find amusing is that scammers have my phone number but my wife's name - so I get random calls where they say "Can I speak to Ms Arethuza" and I say "No" and end the call.

Weird. AFAIK nowadays the contacts are bought from lists out of online orders where your name is there. Do you shop in your wife's name?

No - she does book restaurants in my name as hers is quite complicated to spell!

Re: Daisy, an AI granny wasting scammers' time

#239

Post by xnorswap »

ryandrake wrote: post #204
mos_basik wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's EVE Online's approach to fighting ingame "email" spam [0]. Every player can configure an amount of ingame money that is levied from a sender's account to deliver a message to them. It's a currency sink, so it's themed as a "tax" levied by the NPCs and its value is destroyed rather than paid to the recipient of the message. I thought it used to default to 5 ISK (a pittance, something you can make back by shooti…

> it's themed as a "tax" levied by the NPCs and its value is destroyed rather than paid to the recipient of the message. It’s a cool idea and would work good for real world fines, too: fines that destroy the money paid instead of transfer it (to the city, the court, the police and so on). The fines would disincentivize bad behavior, while also not incentivizing the police to “go generate some crime” because it pays t…

Some argue that's how taxes work already. Taxation destroys money, government spending creates money.

MMT (modern monetary theory) argues that taxation isn't about "funding", it's actually about controlling inflation.

MMT is somewhat controversial.

Post reply on HN