this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2024
837 points (99.4% liked)

Programmer Humor

32910 readers
987 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tourist@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago (5 children)

why bother with the variations?

think they're hoping to knock the same victim more than once?

messed up

[–] Deebster@programming.dev 85 points 1 year ago

Maybe it's an attempt to evade automated systems that check for spam.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Probably a basic way to evade spam detection. If you start sending the exact same message to 500 people, most chat services will shut that shit down in an instant. But if you send unique messages, it makes you look more like a real person, and the chat system may let it slide.

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's bad is that modern spam detection can employ semantic algorithms so it would still catch all of them as the I'm as message. The use of synonyms in the optionals is a huge vulnerability in the scam.

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, it does not appear to be a terribly sophisticated system to begin with...

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 year ago

So that their fixed script isn't so predictable that we can just nuke them by looking for identical conversations.

[–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

I would say more likely to get around bot protection.

[–] Jknaraa@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Could be to match the style of the target, to try and make the conversation feel more natural for them.