Slashdot Mirror
Barcode Scam Redux - Target's $4.99 iPod
abscondment writes "Nearly a year ago, two couples were charged with scamming WalMart for nearly $1.5 Million by creating custom barcodes with reduced prices. You'd think that in the intervening months, other companies would guard against such shenanigans - but today we see that Target just caught a scammer buying iPods for $4.99! The 19 year old used BarCode Magic to create fake barcodes, buying expensive electronics suspiciously low prices. Personally, I would have gone for a less blatant discount, or refrained from visiting the same store so soon afterwards."
Ouch, ... that's gonna leave a mark...
Personally, I would have gone for a less blatant discount, or refrained from visiting the same store so soon afterwards.
Personally, I would have been honest.
Sony ha
I think that the bigger question is how much it costs to prevent such theft. If it doesn't happen often, why would a store put in a permanent fix for the problem? They don't station security guards at the end of every aisle to prevent casual stealing, so why is this any different?
If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
$4.99 for a $150 Ipod? And why didn't the cashier notice? Of course, he tries to do it again, but the article doesn't say if it's the same Target. If it is, what a moron. Go to a different store (if you're so ethically declined).
What happened to "Personally, I would have not considered committing fraud in the first place"?
I think that he should be happy he didn't get caught in Singapore. I understand that their caning punishment isn't very pleasant.
If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
Chilldafuckout. Geeks (in the Jon Katz sense) can't resist an optimization problem. It's not an ethical issue... just another abstraction in a life that's probably filled with abstractions. Just because I think, Suppose I were an iPod thief... what's the best way for me to balance the risk/reward equation? doesn't mean I don't respect property rights, or that I'm even remotely likely to steal anything in the real world.
The crime is in getting caught? No, the crime was in fraudulently purchasing items. What's wrong with today's youth that think it's not cheating or stealing if you don't get caught? No wonder crime is such a problem. You need to grow up and realize that breaking the rules/law is wrong whether or not you get caught.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
TFA reads basically as a step-by-step guide to teach any-and-everyone how to (at least attempt to) pull off a similar barcode scam. From the googling for the name of the barcode software, to outlining his method for affixing the faux-UPCs to the box and then looking for relatively ignorant checkout cashiers to use...this article explains it all. Hell, it even mentions that the 'Barcode Magic' software has a 15-day free trial. My quetions: (1) How in the hell is that relevant to the article? and (2) How many kiddies are now going to read this, download the software, and start perpetrating their own scams? Sheesh...
"I will NEVER EVER DO THIS EVER AGAIN and I am once more terribly sorry," Baldino wrote in a statement for police. "Please let me go for I am terribly sorry!!! I'm only a kid! Help me out. I just want to go home. I did this not knowing of the serious penalty that lies behind it. Please! Please! Please!"
What a spoiled little punk. He didn't know stealing was against the law? He was old enough to come up with this scam and steal, and now suddenly he's just an innocent kid?
I say they give him the chair.
No, but seriously, the attitude of this kid sickens me. Do the crime, get ready to do the time. At 19, you're a little old to be whining like an adolescent.
Barcodes are fairly easy to create using just a PC and a decent quality laser printer.
If they took it to the extreme that you needed to have a certain font card (a nice DIMM or SIMM) to produce any barcode, it would slow folks down a whole lot. When you have to spend a hundred or two to get the font card, the price for entry will slow down the casual twit.
15 day free trial on that program. That part just cracks me up.
Lest there be any doubt, I agree with you completely.
It is idiots like him who give the likes of the RIAA their pull with Congress and other lawmakers.
And 95.21% statistics are bullshit made up on the spot.
One hint: 10 orders of magnitudes more than a single ipod is more than the domestic product of the world... during this whole decade.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
I don't condone fraud by any means, but it's hardly surprising scams like this work (sorta). When you pay people peanuts and demand that they shut their brains off and be good little living robots, they're not likely to notice or care what comes up when they scan an item. In fact, a fair portion of them probably give a silent little cheer if they see the store get ripped off.
The fact is that a candy bar or an iPod doesn't impact them all that much. But even those add up fast. But the real damage comes from people who find a decent grift and work it well. That can add up to a serious pile of money fast -- doubly bad if their scam takes money out of the registers and into the pockets of the naughty boys.
I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
Uh, dude, if someone is selling gas for 10 cents a gallon, you KNOW the price is wrong. That's the issue here. So, if an ATM suddenly decides to spit out money, it's OK to just grab a bunch of it? Taking something that's not yours is theft -- period. Not much difference whether you counterfeit the UPC or the machine screws up. If you know the price is definitely wrong, you are basically stealing.
What's interesting is that he's facing a felony count because he used the old barcode trick. If he'd just stuffed it down his pants and walked out he'd just have a misdemeanor theft. Did any of us realize that printing a label raised the stakes so much?
I would like to point out that it is the previous generation(s) who hold positions of influence in business and government routinely get away with henious crimes. (Take small sentences for destroying retirement funds for thousands of people, among other things.) We frequently see the wealthy and powerful get away with minor punishments that are effectively summed up as serving a prison sentence on a yaht in the Caribbean. Meanwhile, our society is replete with cases of minor offenses being punished beyond any reasonable severity. ($250,000 and larger fines for music swappers, or felony charges for young children reading passwords printed on their computers, for example.) If I was a young person, I would be extremely confused. Does this mean that the more serious your crimes are, the less serious the consequences? Does this mean I can do whatever I want if I am affluent? Given that getting into some trouble is part of youth, this makes for a dangerous influence. There are also plenty of cases where breaking the law is not “wrong”, so we cannot treat this as an absolute either. What Rosa Parks did was not wrong or unethical (quite the opposite), but it was most certainly against the rules.
So, you are absolutely correct that stealing is wrong, as is breaking most laws. However, I think we as a society need to do a few things (which come to mind) if we are to have any success in reducing crime. First, the punishments must fit the crime. Copying digital music should not have equal or worse consequences to stealing millions, perhaps billions from a corporation. Murder is a felony charge, not typing a password printed on the bottom of your laptop. You get the idea. Second, we must teach people how to properly evaluate laws and whether or not they are just. This is intrinsic to the continued operation of our democracy but it is hardly given any treatment. People must be able to determine which laws are reasonable insofar as the gravity of violations, and which laws must be disobeyed for the greater good. Third, we need to restore equal application under law irregardless of political, social, or economic standing. Today, the wealthy can afford good lawyers who are better versed in the law and thus finding loopholes. Meanwhile, the poor rarely have competent defense. This is very biased, and aside from being unfair and unjust, it also leads to further crime (these cycles are much more likely to be perpetuated in the lower classes).
Join Tor today!
Today's youth? You mean like the Congressmen and corporate CEOs who gave been making the news lately? Remember that Congressman last week? The one who was tearfully resigning because he'd got caught taking bribes? And he started crying during his resignation speech? Well if he really cared about that crap he was talking about at the time (The trust of his family or some such) he wouldn't have taken the bribes in the first place. He was a happy camper until he got caught. That's what he was really crying about. Life was good until he got caught. Live was good for those Tycho guys, the Enron guys, the MCI guy, Martha Stewart... All right up until they got caught. You going to point your finger at the kids and ask what is wrong with them? Well they don't have very good role models, for one thing.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I'm sorry, but would you just go limp and not defend yourself if some random person (the fry's managers don't wear uniforms where I live, and the whole point of my post was what if someone made a mistake) pulled you (or attempted to) through your car window?
Or would you fight?
If you did, would you use a fist? your keys? a bat? a knife?
Anything you had within reach? I'm pretty sure you would use anything in reach because I don't think you could decide as to what you would use to defend yourself between the time it took for the guy to grab you and the time your ass hit the pavement.
Not sure of your ethical standards, but once someone is actually trying to hurt me or my family I'm going to defend myself with whatever I have handy unless they identify themselves as the police or something similar. If you don't feel that way, well, fine, I guess, but I think your post has more to do with "OMFG!!!1 t3h gunz!!" than an argument on whether someone should fight back with whatever they have handy if they are pulled out their car.
*shrug* I guess.
Getting pulled out of a car is an extremely violent and aggressive action - it is inexcusable for a store employee (anyone, for that matter - except perhaps the police in the most extreme circumstances) to do this, likewise, the attacker should expect an extremely violent and aggressive response.
And if you believe that every situation that occurs between an armed person and someone else ends in a shooting, you're wrong.
While armed, I've personally been robbed once (stupid drunk jock decided to steal a toner cartridge) and have had someone try to mug me. In both cases, I had a handgun either in my hand or in a pocket, but didn't even draw it in (in the first case, the handgun was in the trunk / boot)
Sometimes letting a drunk take an $80 item or throwing a swift punch to the side of the head is all that is necessary to diffuse a situation.
Amazingly, people carrying guns don't become mindless killers that will shoot people at the slightest provocation.
Oh, and although you may be under the impression that your police officers are unarmed - this doesn't necessarily mean they don't carry. Some NZ police carry in an armpit holster, some (usually higher ranking officers) carry multiple firearms in their trunks of their cars. Heck, NZ cops (airport, etc) _have_ to carry and some cop shot a guy for attacking people with a baseball bat a few years ago, but they carry concealed to make the public feel good.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf