Slashdot Mirror


Jail 'Greedy' Scam Victims, Says Nigerian Diplomat

AcidAUS writes with this nearly unbelievable snippet from today's Sydney Morning Herald: "The Nigerian high commissioner in Australia says people who are ripped off by so-called Nigerian scams are just as guilty as the fraudsters and should be jailed. Responding to a story in yesterday's Herald, which revealed Australians lose at least $36 million a year to the online scams, Sunday Olu Agbi said Australians had failed to heed repeated warnings not to deal with shady characters on the internet."

809 comments

  1. dumb people lose money, not freedom by Dan+B. · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

    --
    Dan. -- So what if it's spelt wrong, nobody's perfect
    1. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A fool and his money are soon parted...

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    2. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Fleeced · · Score: 5, Funny

      A fool and his money are soon parted...

      That'd make a good slogan:

      "Nigeria... parting fools from their money since 1992"

    3. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by kesuki · · Score: 2, Interesting

      http://directmag.com/mag/marketing_oldest_scam/ it at least dates back to 1854, i don't know if that quite qualifies as the 'oldest' scam, personally i thought the oldest scam was pillaging. that came along with the bronze age, if it wasn't already popular in the stone age. (having better weapons allows you to pillage, for a living, without worrying they'll uprise)

    4. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by clarkkent09 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

      I don't know if it's as clear cut as that. Typically the victims of this scam agree to break the law in some way, in some cases to participate in committing a massive financial fraud. Kind of like those guys who sell crappy speakers dressed up as the expensive ones, and justify the low price by hinting that they are stolen. If the speakers were in fact stolen people would be breaking the law by buying them, so why is it different if they just believe that they are stolen?

      No, I don't really think these poor suckers should go to jail, I just don't think it's unbelievable to even suggest that, as the summary says.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    5. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Friday, August 22, 2008 0:45 AM
      From: "Financier Company"
      To: undisclosed-recipients

      Good Day

      We want to confirm from your end if you have sucessfully receive your Winnings from the Lottery Board Commission (LBC) and according to our investigation regarding your Winnings, we heard that you were ask to pay some Charges and you were unable to raise the money.

      Please we want you to send us the following informations below to enable us send you the money.
      1. Your Full Name:
      2. Your Contact Address:
      3. Your Phone Number:
      4. Your Country
      Note with this three informations to this E-mail:(jamesfinancier1@yahoo.com.hk) we will be able to send you the money sucessfully.

      Once again congratulation thanks for your understanding.

      Warm Regard
      Paul James.

    6. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by gnick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

      Devil's advocate:
      Well, they did attempt to commit a crime. If punished, they earned it unless they really thought that what they were doing was somehow legal. If it was made clear to them that the deal was shady and they attempted to go through with it, what difference does it make whether the person at the other end is a scamster or an undercover cop conducting a sting?

      Answer to my own question:
      1) The victim was actively pursued and persuaded to take part in the illegal activity. That sounds a helluva lot like entrapment.
      2) Records of the victim's communications should be inadmissible unless they make a habit out of this kind of crime and there's a warrant to snoop. As far as their attempted fraudulent financial transactions? I dunno, IANAL.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    7. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
      Fools and their money are soon parted but it's good to keep up with the scams so that we can be less foolish. Here are two scams that I've seen recently:

      #1) A $3500 cheque with your name on it arrives in the mail. That evening you receive a phone call saying that it was an accident and could you wire back the money, but you can keep $500 for your troubles. So you deposit the cheque and wait a week for it to clear and then send $3000 to the scammer. When a cheque has "cleared" (when money appears in your account) it's not necessarily all done and legit -- the bank can revoke that money for weeks after. So 3 weeks later the bank realises that the cheque was illegitimate and they pull $3500 out of your account so you're down $3000 which has gone to the scammer.

      #2) Door to door people from the gas company asking to see gas bills because of a printing error. They might have id and a clipboard and a nice tie, and they might have gotten your name from letters in your letter box. They take down some notes about the bill and perhaps even ask you for id and later they perform some identity theft crime.

    8. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jmorris42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Typically the victims of this scam agree to break the law in some way,

      Exactly right. Bust em all for attempted wire fraud to start with and go from there. You have to work both ends of the supply and demand on these things, especially since on end is typically in lawless parts of the world like Nigeria but one end is typically in a country where people have enough cash to be worth trying to rip off.

      Way too many stupid people think they can try to work those deals, in the belief that they can prevent being ripped off if it is a scam and in the hope they might just hit the one that is 'legit.' These idiots don't understand what is actually happening, that it is usually an identity theft happening. Put the threat of jail time for even TRYING to hook up with the "Nigerean minister of finance" and we might take a bite outta crime. Same for all the other spam scams involving illegal acts. We have to get serious about stopping this crap.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    9. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by interactive_civilian · · Score: 5, Funny

      "It's immoral to let a sucker keep his money." - Canada Bill Jones, 19th century poker player

      :D

      --
      "Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
    10. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by oxygen_deprived · · Score: 0

      "Attempt to murder", "attempt to rape" are crimes in many countries. The perpetrator wanted to commit to crime, but couldn't. So is abetment In the scams, the victims intend to abet the perpetrators and fail in the attempt. Alternatively, lets say there were a bank heist in your locality, and the robbers couldnt get away with the booty.Instead, they hide it somewhere, and run. Later they offer you a percentage to retrieve the booty.You agree. Would it be a crime ? Probably yes. How are the nigerian scam victims any different ? After all, they wanted to make quick bucks by helping someone get away with ill gotten wealth. Of course there are flaws with this kind of reasoning, but the high commisioner does have a point. Imagine a genuine nigerian firm making a sales pitch to the wetern market.

    11. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Detritus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, they don't deserve to lose their money. Not everyone is born with above-average intelligence and a skeptical view of their fellow man. By definition, a large percentage of the population is stupid. That doesn't mean that they deserve to be victimized by the criminal classes of society.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    12. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by gnick · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm afraid that the scammers have gotten craftier than that - I understand that they're relating to the Aussies very well. The latest one that I had forwarded to me read:

      " G'day mate! I were just out in me back yard throwing another dingo on the barbie and bruising up a warm lager when I happened on a smattering of GOLD! Now me and me sheila aren't exactly the rightful owners of this here parcel, but we managed to shift the yellow off onto a friendly bugger who handed over a check. All we need is a good buddy to shift the funds around, take a princely cut for 'imself, and PayPal us the balance.

      Whaddaya say, mate? Are we chummy? "

      [Sorry to all the real Australians out there - I'm in the US and only speak American. The only Australian that I know I learned from Crocodile Dundee, Yahoo Serious, and the Crocodile Hunter. (But I do have the good sense not to throw a dingo on my barbie).]

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    13. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Haoie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure that Nigerian scams [and its variants] existed before 1992.

      The internet just made it a lot more visible.

      --
      If each mistake being made is a new one, then progress is being made.
    14. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just so that I don't make people paranoid here's how to respond to these two scenarios:

      Re #1) Don't deposit or cash the cheque. You may be stung by the bank for fees related to the illegitimate cheque.

      Re #2) You should respond to these people to verify who they are by phoning the gas company. Alternatively say that you're going to get the bill and tell them to wait at the door as you close it in their face and go crack open a beer.

    15. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by ceoyoyo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really, they're very lucky. If the scam wasn't a scam they'd be rotting away in some Nigerian jail for money laundering or fraud. Instead, all they lost was money.

    16. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by r_jensen11 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Way too many stupid people think they can try to work those deals...

      Whatever. As long as whoever comes out ahead with the money classifies it as 'Illegal Income' when filing his/her tax returns at the end of the year, I'm fine with whatever. The one thing I can't *stand* is tax evaders!

    17. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well thanks a million, mate. You just made me spray warm lager out of my nose. ;0)

    18. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Fleeced · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm pretty sure that Nigerian scams [and its variants] existed before 1992.

      The internet just made it a lot more visible.

      This is true. In fact, it was a pretty common fax-scam in the 80's - and probably came in many other forms too.

    19. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mellon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not just dumb people. It's your mom or dad, if they wind up with some kind of aging-related disease that affects their judgement. Or you, in a few years. Losing everything because of that is a pretty harsh outcome.

    20. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by wellingj · · Score: 1

      Instant classic!

    21. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the speakers were in fact stolen people would be breaking the law by buying them, so why is it different if they just believe that they are stolen?

      Um.. it's different because they aren't actually breaking the law.

      Similarly, if you're driving 25 MPH in a 35 zone but you believe you're going 45, you aren't speeding. And if you break into a house, but it turns out to be your own house, you aren't trespassing.

      Arrest the real criminals, not people who mistakenly think they're criminals.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    22. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by WGFCrafty · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or:

      "Nigeria... jailing fools for parting with their money since 2008."

    23. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by eln · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I just don't get how people are stupid enough to fall for #1. A check is just a piece of paper until it's cashed. Offer to void it and send it back to them through the mail. If they refuse, they're obviously shady, so just hang up. I guess it's the same reason people fall for all scams: they let their greed get in the way of their common sense.

      #2 is a little more understandable since people tend to trust people in uniform, but giving anyone the kind of information they would need to steal your identity is just foolish unless you initiated the interaction yourself (say, by calling the gas company directly).

    24. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Firehed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not quite. By definition, half of the population is of below-average intelligence: at or below 100 IQ points. Right now, average isn't going too far and seems to be getting worse by the day (see: idiocracy), but that doesn't mean it always has or will be the case. Yes, when you fit a bell curve to the entire human population, half by definition have to fall on the left side, but that entire bell curve can (and does) still shift relative to a point that one might consider "smart".

      Now I agree that doesn't mean that stupid people should become fraud victims (unless I profit, in which case all bets are off), I just felt the need to be pedantic especially given the context of the discussion.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    25. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, excuse the criminals and blame the victim.

    26. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sjames · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's certainly how they started, and most of the unlikely stories are still structured as embezzlement, but there are a few that *could* appear to be legal if you're naive enough (and anyone falling for the scam IS).

      Then, there's the spam I got the other day claiming to be from the FBI. It claimed that they were aware of my pending transaction and that their investigations had found it to be perfectly legal and legitimate. If you're naive enough to believe the crazy scam in the first place, you'll likely think the follow-up actually came from the FBI as well.

      Another largish chunk make it look like they need your help to scam a bank before it confiscates someone's inheritance. While that's not exactly legal, neither is what they claim that the bank will do otherwise. If you somehow manage to take the story at face value, the victim could believe that they are bending the rules a bit to prevent a much larger injustice.

      In those cases, it *IS* close to unbelievable that a diplomat from the country that does nothing to control the rampant fraud would dare to blame the victim. The fraud is so prevalent that for many fraud and Nigeria have become synonymous.

      Then, of course, there's the death threat extortions. Does he think those are the victim's fault as well?

      While I agree that this is perpetrated by a small percentage of the population, and I can sympathize with all Nigerians who get painted with the same brush as the frauds, his statement wasn't very diplomatic to say the least. Perhaps a more constructive approach would be to ask for assistance in tracking down the scammers.

    27. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by statusbar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A fool and his money are best parted, because the last thing you want in this world are fools with economic power.

      --jeffk++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    28. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Jorophose · · Score: 1

      Mind listing other ones?

      It's important that your fellow /.ers don't get scammed. =(

    29. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      1) The victim was actively pursued and persuaded to take part in the illegal activity. That sounds a helluva lot like entrapment.

      Except of course for the pesky part about it having to be the State which does the persuading. If, say, Fat Tony persuades you to steal, it's still a crime.

    30. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by hellwig · · Score: 1

      "To catch an incompetent wire-fraud artist" just doesn't have the same ring to it. But really, since the Nigerian scams aren't being backed by a government entity running a sting operation, there's no claim to entrapment or anything like that. Whether the deal is legit or not, attempting to commit wire fraud in these cases should be punishable. Remember, ignorance of the law is not an excuse. If these people wanted to cover themselves, they should have consulted a financial expert, as with any financial transaction of that magnitude. Of course, common sense would tell some of us not to do it in the first place.

      --
      Eggs
      Milk
      Bread
      Cat Litter
      Soda
      ...
    31. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm assuming Foster's, but what is the proper lager that should be served warm beside a freshly BBQed dingo?

    32. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Samah · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nice one ;)
      Some corrections for you though, so that next time you can REALLY sound like an Aussie.
      * Obviously you quite tastefully combined the "dingo ate my baby" and "shrimp on the barbie", but I'll point out that most Australians call it a "prawn", and I personally don't know ANYONE who barbecues them.
      * Australians drink lager cold (except the weird ones...) I believe the stereotype is that the British drink it warm, but I don't know if that's true. One of my Brit friends told me it was "bollocks".
      * Australians (for the most part) follow British English conventions, so it's "cheque", not "check".
      The rest is bonza ;)

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    33. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by black_lbi · · Score: 1

      A fool and his money are soon parted...

      How many more times am I going to hear the same thing over and over again?
      Is it somehow funny? I just don't get it. Could someone please explain, before I completely lose my mind?

    34. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      No need for the disclaimer. I have been to Australia dozens of times... and that is exactly how they talk.

      And Aussies have been known to throw a few "roos" (kangaroo) on the barbie...

    35. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      A dingo ate my baby.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    36. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Sorry to all the real Australians out there - I'm in the US and only speak American. The only Australian that I know I learned from Crocodile Dundee, Yahoo Serious, and the Crocodile Hunter. (But I do have the good sense not to throw a dingo on my barbie).]

      Don't apologise for that. If you must apologise, then make it for this: I'm a red-blooded Aussie, and on reading your post, it was only sheer force of will that kept me from reaching for my wallet.

    37. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful
      If you're going to be a pedant, try to pay attention first. He did not say that below average intelligence was required to fall for it. He said both an above average intelligence and a skeptical view were. Obviously the set of people not meeting those qualifications will be more than half the population, and perhaps quite a bit more than half. And he said only a "large percentage."

      So thank you for your grade-school-quality pedantry.

      Now, of course, you will take up some other irrelevant argument to foolishly attempt to defend yourself.

    38. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by CoopersPale · · Score: 3, Informative

      A VB mate, Victoria Bitter.
      Known just by it's colour up north, as in 'I'll have a slab of green tins mate'.
      Fosters is a rarity in Australia, I think its made overseas more than in Oz.

      But I'd prefer a Coopers.

    39. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like the sound of your proposal.

      Please send me photographic proof of you attempting to throw a dingo (note: dingo must be alive, fit and unrestrained), following this I will gladly send you my bank a/c details.

    40. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mmmmmm. Warm Australian nose lager.

      *drool*

    41. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were so close... But we spell it cheque

    42. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need for the disclaimer. I have been to Australia dozens of times... and that is exactly how they talk.

      You apparently didn't notice that Australian's like to drink their beer cold.

    43. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were spot on. We all talk like that except for one small mistake.

      It's "cheque", not "check".

    44. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP post:

      ...what difference does it make whether the person at the other end is a scamster or an undercover cop conducting a sting?

      Miss that? Sounds pretty similar to your point...

    45. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      personally i thought the oldest scam was pillaging. that came along with the bronze age, if it wasn't already popular in the stone age. (having better weapons allows you to pillage, for a living, without worrying they'll uprise)

      I don't think pillaging qualifies as a scam, the victims don't think the perpetrators are doing them a favour at any point in the process...

    46. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by MrCreosote · · Score: 2, Funny

      "(But I do have the good sense not to throw a dingo on my barbie)"

      Quite right. Dingo's are best pan fried, with some garlic, shallots, cream and white wine. Thylacines were the preferred choice of fauna for the BBQ, but the demand led to their extinction. Tasmanian Devils make a poor substitute.

      --
      MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
    47. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Brain+Damaged+Bogan · · Score: 1

      racial profiling! we'd never eat dingo. kangaroo, crocodile, even emu... but never dingo!

      --
      -- Sex is the antonym of pringles. Once you pop it's time to stop.
    48. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Warm larger? Are you mad, or British?

      --
      http://www.xkcd.com/354/
    49. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Why bother? I'm not the one posting as AC.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    50. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Maybe not your freedom, but maybe you should have your head examined if you fall for these scams.

      The big issue is if you have a family and the family suffers for your greed.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    51. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given the magnitude of the sums purportedly to be funneled out of these poor countries, the "victims" in these cases are more analogous to someone who takes money and a gun from someone to kill another person but when they pull the trigger the (rigged) gun blows up on them. Sure, they got hurt, but they should still go to jail for the attempted murder and conspiracy. Wire fraud is illegal. Why shouldn't attempted wire fraud be? Just because they lost some money too?

    52. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Pantero+Blanco · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A fool and his money are best parted, because the last thing you want in this world are fools with economic power.

      True, but having leeches who live off of others and don't mind wrecking a stranger's life isn't any better.

      Someone willing to cheat a fool is probably willing to cheat you too, and there are plenty of fools in positions that will let them do it.

    53. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by halln · · Score: 1

      Taking the typical scam and assuming the scammer is not law enforcement, then there is no entrapment defense. Entrapment cannot be committed by non-law enforcement or non-government officials.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment
      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/entrapment
      http://www.grayarea.com/entrap.htm

      IANAL,
      --
      Nathan

    54. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by benfell · · Score: 1

      No, I don't really think these poor suckers should go to jail, I just don't think it's unbelievable to even suggest that, as the summary says.

      It certainly isn't unbelievable, but there is another angle to all this.

      There is little (if any) justice in the economic hierarchy today. If people perceive they are being stolen from, even by the elite, and they see no other opportunity for themselves, then it becomes a little harder to blame them.

      Yes, they're stupid. But they might also be desperate.

    55. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      A closer analogy might be a friend promising you some of the insurance money settlement for burning down his house, then skipping town with it all.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    56. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by BattleApple · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that one's getting old. Here's another one.. "You can't cheat an honest man"

    57. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Wire fraud is illegal. Why shouldn't attempted wire fraud be?

      Because the alleged money doesn't exist. It's nothing but a thoughtcrime: you want to lock people up for a naughty feeling inside their own heads.

      It's not like pointing a gun at someone and then finding that the gun blows up in your face. It's more like pointing a toy gun at a cardboard cutout of a person, but being too blind to realize that it's all fake: there was never any possibility of harming a real person.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    58. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      An even closer analogy might be a friend promising you some of the insurance money settlement for burning down his house, when he doesn't actually have an insurance contract. Or a house. And you don't even get as far as starting the fire, you just agree to the plan.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    59. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont know if you're taking the piss or not mate, but its a prawn on the barbie and a dingo that ate a baby.
      I am Australian :)

      Who drinks warm larger btw? eww

    60. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *cringe*

    61. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

      A fool and his money were lucky to be together in the first place!

    62. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by nametaken · · Score: 1

      Seriously, who let this degenerate open his mouth? First he says the victims are just as guilty as the criminals. That's retarded. Then says the Nigerian government is working very hard to curtail this behavior. Obviously dogshit. Then points out that only, what, 14 million people in Nigeria are engaged in fraudulent activities on the internet?

      Someone should beat this guy to death with a stick.

    63. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      I think you might be missing the conspiracy aspect of it. The problem is not their thoughts but the fact that they are conspiring with another person to commit a crime. Similarly, a person A might agree to blow up a building or engage in a drug transaction with a person B when there is no real explosive or drugs involved at all as the person B is actually an undercover cop.

      Conspiracy - an agreement between persons to break the law at some time in the future. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(crime)

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    64. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Well, unless that wasn't your money. Some of the victims have embezzled or stolen money to take part in the scam, probably because they thought they could pay it back later.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    65. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by nametaken · · Score: 1

      It IS unbelievable. The 419's rarely have anything blatantly illegal in them, they're just scams.

      Don't stretch to play devils advocate.

    66. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      But you forget these people are not just dumb enough to fall for the scam they are also: 1. Greedy, and 2. willing to commit what seems to be a crime to enrich themselves.

    67. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Some laws have a "the attempt is punishable" clause. It's usually a reduced sentence but attempting to break the law, even if you fail, can still incur a punishment.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    68. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by TriggerFin · · Score: 1

      So, in spite of what the NHC said, one would do better to just not trust Nigerians in general?
      Like, say, him?

      --
      Here's your sig.
    69. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Even if you accidentally grabbed a toy gun and accidentally "fired" it at a wardrobe instead of a person there's still the possibility of an "attempted murder" charge (though I guess a good lawyer could get rid of that). It makes sense since the wannabe-murderer might have a reason to try again with a real gun.

      Hell, how is it different from trying to date a 13 year old on the internet when all you're talking to is an FBI agent? The victim doesn't exist, the act was never committed yet someone gets jailed.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    70. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh really? [citation needed]! The seller would be breaking the law, not the buyer.
      Plus it is super hard to prove!

    71. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I just don't get how people are stupid enough to fall for #1. A check is just a piece of paper until it's cashed.

      That's the thing though, even after it's cashed it can be withdrawn when the bank realises what's going on (which can be weeks later).

    72. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by complete+loony · · Score: 1
      Depends which part of the country / social status you're trying to do an impression of but most of these would be recognisable to any local;
      • XXXX "Good as Gold mate" (pronounced four-ex because we can't spell beer)
      • VB "Victoria Bitter"
      • Coopers Pale
      • West End Draught
      • Tooheys
      • Cascade

      If in doubt, google seems fairly knowledgeable on the subject.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    73. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      It makes a difference in court. Entrapment is merely to prevent the government from creating reasons to arrest someone (since the government also does the arresting they are a special case), in part because the government should NEVER want the crime to succeed and therefore it's assumed the only thing the govt tried to do was creating an excuse to arrest someone. A private person may very well want the crime to be successful (e.g. hiring a contract killer) and is therefore interested in the crime itself rather than the guilt arising from it.

      Now of course the other question is whether Nazi soldiers could have claimed entrapment...

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    74. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Right now, average isn't going too far and seems to be getting worse by the day (see: idiocracy)

      The Flynn effect suggests the opposite but as they say, the sum of the IQs in a crowd is constant.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    75. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by GradiusCVK · · Score: 5, Insightful
      1: Entrapment is when a law enforcement official convinces you to break the law. If a drug dealer walks up to you on the street and convinces you to buy a kilo of heroin, you're going to jail buddy.
      2: Making a habit out of something is irrelevant. In fact, a person's history of criminality is inadmissible as evidence for or against them (thanks to the Constitution, I think). It may be used in determining their punishment if convicted, but not in determining their guilt. Only evidence relating to their current trial is admissible for that. That said, records of their communications directly related to the current trial are most certainly admissible, and the police would no doubt get a warrant to obtain that obvious source of information.

      As far as their attempted fraudulent financial transactions...

      ...they are illegal. Look up "fraud".

      I dunno, IANAL

      No kidding... neither am, I but this is pretty basic stuff here. How does something like that earn +5 insightful??

    76. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by chthon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Already in the 80's, with fax machines instead of the internet.

    77. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by ChameleonDave · · Score: 1

      You miss the point. It's not that they have been defrauded, and we should blame the victim. It's that they believed they were going to profit from illegal activity.

    78. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re #1: even if it wasn't a scam, that's the best course of action because until a cheque is deposited no money has been "sent".

    79. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by houghi · · Score: 1

      Instead we give then political power.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    80. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Nutria · · Score: 1

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

      The "mark" knows that what he's doing is illegal, because usually the fraudster plainly states that it's not his money.

      So, the the "mark" is guilty of attempted fraud.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    81. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by houghi · · Score: 1

      By definition, a large percentage of the population is stupid.

      By what definition is that? The only thing that I can come up with is that 50% of the population is less smart then average. That does not mean they are stupid. It just means that 50% is below the average by definition.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    82. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jabithew · · Score: 1

      I don't think a demand-side squeeze will occur until half the western world is in jail.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    83. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 5, Funny

      And before that, they used the african swallow.

      --
      She made the willows dance
    84. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good on ya!

    85. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pillaging is hardly a scam. It's immoral, but it is at least honest. Unless you lie about it, of course.

      "I'm only killing people with genetic defects! It's for the good of your gene pool!"

      "I'm stimulating the yurt building industry!"

      "I'm a radical environmentalist and you're wrecking the local squirrel population!"

    86. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These idiots don't understand what is actually happening,

      Yes, it's a sad fact of life.

      that it is usually an identity theft happening.

      Indeed, even on Slashdot!

      (Hint: it's not usually about identity theft, but most of the times, it's into conning the victims into paying various bribes, administrative fees, bank fees, safekeeping fees for the "security company", etc. to liberate the funds. Each payment is small enough not to rouse any suspicion, but once one is done, along comes the next snag on the way to the riches.)

      Put the threat of jail time for even TRYING to hook up with the "Nigerean minister of finance" and we might take a bite outta crime.

      That would be exactly the wrong thing to do. It'd scare the victims from reporting the crime, making the real criminals safer. And that's actually the reason why the cover stories for these frauds invovle "slightly" illegal acts: in order to scare the victims to keep quiet.

    87. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by localman · · Score: 1

      I never saw them drink it warm in the UK, but they don't drink it ice cold either, which is what is common in the US. In the US there is generally no such thing as serving a beer too cold. My buddy keeps mugs in the freezer and his fridge on 35F so it forms some ice crystals when he pours it. In the UK they seem to serve it chilled to a specific temperature, say 55F. Kind of like a wine aficionado might do. It's definitely chilled but I can see plenty of yanks calling it "warm".

      Also, it's pretty damn tasty.

      Cheers.

    88. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Warm larger? Are you mad, or British?

      For the record, in Britain:

          Warm beer*, maybe
          Warm lager, never

      * Where said beer is not a lager

    89. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... so we change "think of the children" to...
      THINK OF THE STUPID!

    90. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      The beauty of these scams is that they run on greed.

      I mean , the simplest solution to the check problem is to send the cheque back to the owner. But then they miss out on the $500 . So , people are blinded by those $500 and due whatever is asked from them.

      One thing i noticed is that the money you 'supposedly' get , is reducing with every email. Maybe they discovered that people don't believe it if it's billions of dollars .

    91. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      What do you think of people arrested for soliciting a prostitute (played by a police woman)? A person like that would only have thought to be commiting an illegal act, unless the police woman was prepared to go above and beyond the call of duty.

      There probably is some law making the request for an illegal act an illegal act, but I'm interested in comparing a person soliciting a (fake)prostitute with a person taking part in a supposed Nigerian money laundering scheme. Both people aim to commit a crime, and both end up missing their goals. Are they both innocent?

      --
      She made the willows dance
    92. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by bentcd · · Score: 1

      1) The victim was actively pursued and persuaded to take part in the illegal activity. That sounds a helluva lot like entrapment.

      It's only entrapment if it's the police doing it. If a criminal pursues you and persuades you do commit a crime, you're going to jail.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    93. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by NnT042 · · Score: 1

      The point he was trying to make is that anyone who considers the issue rationally would realize that "accidentally" sending a check somewhere doesn't mean your money is gone, all that person would need to do is void the check by number and issue a new one to the "correct" recipient. Asking the mistaken recipient to deposit the money would be a roundabout and unprofitable way to do the exact same thing, thus it looks suspicious to begin with.

    94. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by nickname29 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The one thing I can't *stand* is tax evaders!

      Yeah I know. Tax evaders are evil - they are withholding money from the state that could be used to finance our wars in Iraq!

      Personally I feel that any american that is paying tax is just as guilty as Bush for the war in Iraq. If you do not like the war, stop paying tax (pay it into a trust until they stop).

    95. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by bentcd · · Score: 1

      It's not just dumb people. It's your mom or dad, if they wind up with some kind of aging-related disease that affects their judgement. Or you, in a few years. Losing everything because of that is a pretty harsh outcome.

      Courts will tend to take medical and mental conditions into account and if it is clear that the victim can not be held responsible for his actions he will be let off. This is no different from your grandma getting busted for shoplifting because she forgot to pay on her way out - if it can be shown that she has memory problems she'll walk.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    96. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the Gardners, AKA the Motley Fool.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    97. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by EdIII · · Score: 1

      No, they don't deserve to lose their money. Not everyone is born with above-average intelligence and a skeptical view of their fellow man.

      They don't deserve to lose their money based on their intelligence, or their vulnerability to a scam. They deserve to lose their money since they were allegedly involved in criminal activity, and as such, do not deserve to profit from their actions. Some people are taking these statements to mean that the soft hearted little old grandmothers who get scammed deserve it since they was not smart enough, or did not possess a cynical and jaded view of humanity. I don't think that is what was intended.

      What I disagree with is the assertion of the Nigerian representative that all Australian "participants" in the scam are AS GUILTY as their Nigerian counterparts. I am not certain, but I doubt that 100% of all Nigerian scams involve activities that any Australian citizen would understand to be illegal in either country. I also find any claims that a large portion of these scams involve embezzlement, or some other sort of similar crime in Nigeria highly dubious in nature. Of those scams that do involve activity which would be deemed illegal under financial/tax laws for either country, I think it is a little zealous to claim that both the scammer and victim share equal guilt. I think that is quite obvious since the crimes are in fact much different.

      If some underage drinkers convince a man to buy them alcohol, they do not share an equal amount of guilt under the law. Far from it. Well the same goes for people that are conspiring to steal money from another person, and a person that is knowingly violating financial/tax disclosure laws. I personally think the vast amount of Nigerian scams, based on my own experience, do not persuade anyone to violate any laws in any country.

      Considering all this, it certainly sounds like the gentleman is "blaming the victims", which is usually quite offensive in any country unless the victim has a vagina and lives in a country under Sharia.

    98. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds a helluva lot like entrapment.

      In an "absolute" sense you are right. In a legal sense of what is written in US law, it is probably right, as well (see John DeLorean) But for the "victims" in the United States, they no longer have the rights guaranteed by the US Constitution, so could probably be sent to prison without having to spend the money on a trial. They might as well be in Germany in the 1930s.

    99. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mcvos · · Score: 1

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

      The diplomat does have a point that the victims were willing to participate in an embezzling scheme. They didn't commit a crime, but they were willing to do so.

      The scammers, on the other hand, most definitely did commit a crime. So the victims are not "just as guilty", but they're not innocent angels either.

    100. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Skrynesaver · · Score: 1

      And with current prices you agree to buy the petrol (gasoline) and give it to them to /mind/.

      --
      "Linux is for noobs"-The new MS fud strategy
    101. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Lyrael · · Score: 1

      It is, in fact, bollocks.

    102. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Alioth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The unintended consequence of this will be to deter the reporting of any attempted financial scam (such as reporting boiler rooms) because the victim will fear that if they did something wrong they may get prosecuted. Indeed, boiler room scammers would probably use this as a threat to continue being suckered and NOT report it (even though the scamee in these instances is not attempting anything illegal - but if they can be suckered in by a boiler room, they can also be suckered in by a boiler room claiming they are now part of a fraud themselves).

    103. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Alioth · · Score: 2, Informative

      British don't drink lager warm. But ale is drunk at the temperature it comes up from the cellar, which is warmer than lager typically is. But then again, lager is served ice cold so you can't actually taste it, because let's face it, most mass produced lagers are pretty rank.

    104. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, you're right. Thanks for clarifying :)

    105. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mcvos · · Score: 1

      I just don't get how people are stupid enough to fall for #1. A check is just a piece of paper until it's cashed. Offer to void it and send it back to them through the mail.

      It is stupid to fall for #1, but it's not dishonest. And a lot of people really are not very smart. Or they have too positive a view of humanity to distrust someone who makes such a reasonable request.

    106. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by b4upoo · · Score: 1

      The people that fall for these scams usually should share in the guilt but in many cases people who are mentally challenged by old age, retardation or other mental disorders are involved. There is no blanket method that can fairly judge all people equally.

    107. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of like those guys who sell crappy speakers dressed up as the expensive ones, and justify the low price by hinting that they are stolen. If the speakers were in fact stolen people would be breaking the law by buying them, so why is it different if they just believe that they are stolen?

      Uhm, perhaps because they are not actually stolen? Just a wild guess.

    108. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Draconix · · Score: 1

      You're being facetious, I hope. Do you realize that the IRS can and will ruin people over tax evasion? Bye bye house, car, savings, a chunk of income, etc.

      Being under coercion that strong assuages guilt. To say American taxpayers are guilty in this situation is like saying a person who got mugged is guilty of murder because the mugger used their money to buy a weapon he killed someone with.

      --
      By reading this you acknowledge that you have read it.
    109. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Misrepresenting your identity in order to make a claim to large sums of money that you have no legitimate claim to is considered fraud in most countries, and hence illegal. Most 419 scams involve such misrepresentation.

    110. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Bob+Gelumph · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You forgot Boag's. Also, to the GP, they were talking about lager. Coopers is an ale (though not like a shit English ale).

      --
      I'm gonna need a spec.
    111. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by JosKarith · · Score: 1

      I thought the saying had become : A Fool and his Money are soon elected...

      --
      'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
    112. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mike2R · · Score: 1

      No one would ever drink warm lager out of choice but there are other beers; bitters and stouts for example, which are generally served at room temperature. Since these would have largely been drunk during the war in Britain, I imagine the meme started by returning American servicemen telling stories to the folks back home. Since most of their listeners probably believed that all beer is yellow and fizzy, they thought the British sat around drinking warm lager.

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    113. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by SidewaysPineTree · · Score: 1

      By definition, half of the population is below the median, not the average. Also, an IQ of 100 is not necessarily the true mean or median of the population, just a close approximation to both since, by the Central Limit Theorem, this kind of data will approximate a normal curve.

    114. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In general there is a really simple rule to protect yourself from scams: If you did not initiate the transaction it is with high probability a scam.

    115. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Hell, how is it different from trying to date a 13 year old on the internet when all you're talking to is an FBI agent? The victim doesn't exist, the act was never committed yet someone gets jailed.

      Frankly, I don't think anyone should be jailed for that either. A crime can't get any more "victimless" than that - the victim is a fictional character!

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    116. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      sure, here's one for you: You get a call from a number that you don't know and it hangs up before you can answer.

      Don't call it back, it'll be a for-pay number that rakes in dough from curious people.

    117. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      I see it as evolution in action: Girls like guys with $ (or so the legend goes ;) ), guys want more $, guys participate in scam, loses $, is less likely to procreate because girls no longer want them.

      The nigerians are doing us all a favour by strengthening the human race.

    118. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      the part that makes all of them unbelievable is that your email address should not be known to them, nobody in such a position would normally contact a random stranger whose email address was generated by psychic means.

    119. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      you should go and watch Forest Gump, I'm pretty sure shrimp on the bbq was in there somewhere.

    120. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by quenda · · Score: 1

      Um.. it's different because they aren't actually breaking the law.

      Nonsense. They could at least be charged with conspiracy, if not attempted whatever.

    121. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not? It's attempted money laundering. Money laundering gets you to jail, just because you failed to commit the crime is not a clear cut case of you being a "victim".

      Attempted murder gets you to jail after all.

    122. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 0

      thought crime is not illegal. You may think about a rape but as long as you don't do it you are not guilty of *anything*. (Except maybe of having a sick mind, but that's not an offense).

    123. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      I think if peoples judgement is affected to the point where they would do that they should have their funds controlled by someone else. This routinely happens with the mentally disabled, trustees usually handle their funds.

      One of the specific goals of this is to protect those people from falling victim to confidence tricksters. The fact that the scams get more elaborate and the cons more clever and so are able to tap in to a larger segment of the population is different.

      However, most of the victims of these crimes are people that are simply driven by greed, not the few exceptions that were genuinely too gullible and that thought they were helping someone.

    124. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      The problem is not their thoughts but the fact that they are conspiring with another person to commit a crime. Similarly, a person A might agree to blow up a building or engage in a drug transaction with a person B when there is no real explosive or drugs involved at all as the person B is actually an undercover cop.

      I would argue that they aren't agreeing to commit a crime.

      They're agreeing to do something that they think is a crime, but it really isn't. I mean, suppose you convince some poor sucker that sugar is illegal, and then you sell him a bag of sugar. It's the same thing: he thinks he's committing a crime, but he isn't. The crime is all in his head.

      We should be concerned with whether he's actually breaking the law, not whether he thinks he is.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    125. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by nickname29 · · Score: 1

      I agree with you that the IRS uses extreme coercion (and with your comparison to a mugging).

      But sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in (you may only lose your house, but a million guys in Iraq lost their lives).

      At least if you disagree with the policies of war in Iraq, you have to agree that taxation is morally reprehensible (at least during the Bush term).

    126. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      There probably is some law making the request for an illegal act an illegal act, but I'm interested in comparing a person soliciting a (fake)prostitute with a person taking part in a supposed Nigerian money laundering scheme. Both people aim to commit a crime, and both end up missing their goals. Are they both innocent?

      Yes. In both cases, there's no actual chance of the crime being committed: the money doesn't really exist, and the policewoman isn't really a prostitute. They might as well all be actors in a play; the only difference is that some of them think the play is real.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    127. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by joto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I just don't get how people are stupid enough to fall for #1. A check is just a piece of paper until it's cashed. Offer to void it and send it back to them through the mail.

      It is stupid to fall for #1, but it's not dishonest. And a lot of people really are not very smart. Or they have too positive a view of humanity to distrust someone who makes such a reasonable request.

      It is dishonest. An honest person would throw the cheque away. Why would you even bother cashing the cheque if it wasn't your money? The only reason would be greed. Only people who want "something for nothing" are going to go for this kind of fraud. Exactly the same people who fall for the nigerian scam.

      Where is the "positive view of humanity" in someone who is so greedy that they'd rather cash in $500 just because someone erroneously sent them a cheque, instead of just tearing it apart? I would describe such a person as "selfish" and "greedy", not "nice".

    128. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

      Are you suggesting the elderly baby-boom generation has to go back to high school to learn to protect their hard-earned investments?

      What's next, needing a license to go online?

      --

      War as we knew it was obsolete
      Nothing could beat complete denial
      - Emily Haines
    129. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

      yes you should be shot instead of jail

    130. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just don't get how people are stupid enough to fall for #1. A check is just a piece of paper until it's cashed.

      There are bank cheques and stuff where the money is already allocated. Maybe they use those in the scam?

      I guess it's the same reason people fall for all scams: they let their greed get in the way of their common sense.

      Agree completely.

    131. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by YourExperiment · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Kind of like those guys who sell crappy speakers dressed up as the expensive ones

      Bose?

    132. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by DrHyde · · Score: 1

      Uh, how on earth are they going to get my name from letters in my letter box? To do that, they need to break in to the property. And the very notion of a utility company sending out a real person instead of having an incomprehensible foreigner from a call centre harass me is ridiculous.

    133. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by v1 · · Score: 1

      the difference being faxes cost money to send (and receive) and email is basically free on both ends, making it both easier to do in bulk, and harder to prosecute.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    134. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, how on earth are they going to get my name from letters in my letter box? To do that, they need to break in to the property.

      Well they walk up onto your property to knock on the door and they don't open the mail they just read the front and apparently they act all neighbourly and hand you your mail as if they're being kind.

    135. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by testadicazzo · · Score: 5, Informative
      If one actually RTFA, one finds the ambassador is specifically talking about scams in which a criminal element is involved. From the article:

      In one version, the scammer poses as a government worker who has embezzled millions of dollars and is offering victims a percentage if they help retrieve the money by providing a relatively small amount of money for bribes or other charges. Professor Olu Agbi said "greedy" Australians who tried to partake in these crimes - even though they are scams - should be arrested as well.

      In this context I'd agree with him. They got what they deserved. But of course these are only a subset of all of the nigerian scams out there.

    136. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by TheLink · · Score: 1

      So those Nigerians get the $$$ and the girls and strengthen the human race?

      --
    137. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Hang on, they are knowingly attempting to commit a crime. The scammers even explain that to you.

      I support this proposal.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    138. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That kind of attitude incenses me. Stop dumbing down the human race. It's bad enough that the television shows (reality TV especially) are appealing to that market which appeals to the lowest common denominator and says 'it's cool to be stupid'.

      This is also the cause of most crazy disclaimers in our modern world - "...but you didn't tell me the coffee was hot", "...how was I to know the superman cape wouldn't let me fly?","I didn't know yoy shouldn't stick a toothpick in your ear". For a child to say these it's probably understandable, but for an adult it's disgraceful.

      There are minimum expectations which ADULTS should be able conform to, and unless there are mitigating circumstances (learning difficulties, old age, illness for example) there is absolutely no reason why these people can't adhere to these expectations. If they can't then they shouldn't be classed as such.

      Wilful ignorance should NEVER be condoned, let alone have excuses made for it.

    139. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by dotgain · · Score: 1

      The book of Genesis?
      ...I'm gonna burrrn.

    140. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by j_sp_r · · Score: 1

      No, you can have an average of 100 where 1/3 of the populations has something like 50 and 2/3 something like 125. You mixed up average and median.

      Of course, if you assume IQ is normally distributed then half of the population has an IQ lower then 100. Although likely, it is possible that there a few really smart people and the rest are idiots

    141. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Australians don't drink warm beer.

    142. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Daimanta · · Score: 2, Funny

      fully loaded or half-loaded?

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    143. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So get aggressive on both supply and demand? Funny, if you said the same thing about the drug trade on slashdot you would be modded down.

    144. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Slashidiot · · Score: 1

      Quoting the great Monty Python, the problem with Australian beer is that it is like making love in a canoe... fucking close to water.

      --
      Tis women makes us love, Tis Love that makes us sad, Tis sadness makes us drink, And drinking makes us mad.
    145. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Drinking beer (not lager[1]) cold started in the USA during prohibition. At this time, the only beer available was black-market, home-brewed stuff that had a very high yeast content. Serving it chilled hid this (it also hid a lot of the flavour). The places selling the black market beer pushed the idea that beer is meant to be served cold because it made their product seem better.

      In the rest of the world, where puritan crazies weren't allowed in government, this never happened, and so it is accepted that beer is drunk at around room temperature, while lager is drunk slightly chilled.

      [1] A decent lager, as can be found in much of continental Europe, is typically also served slightly chilled on a warm day.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    146. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by _merlin · · Score: 1

      That's American beer you fool.

    147. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mspohr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I had a business in the 80's and used to get these letters regularly. Same wording and scam as the current crop but sent as an actual postal mail letter... so even with the cost of the postage, this must have paid well.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    148. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      I agree. Not to them being innocent, but to them not having commited any crimes.

      --
      She made the willows dance
    149. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't mean that they deserve to be victimized by the criminal classes of society.

      By agreeing to launder blood money etc., they belong to the criminal classes of society. They just don't have the necessary skills to survive there. And morally speaking, what they agree to do is more reproachable than what the scammers do.

    150. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

      I believe the stereotype is that the British drink it warm, but I don't know if that's true.

      Actually, the British don't like drinking warm lager any more than anybody else - it's just that their refridgerators are made by Lucas Electric*.

      * - Not mine, seen on fortune (2) or somewhere.

    151. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mcvos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is dishonest. An honest person would throw the cheque away. Why would you even bother cashing the cheque if it wasn't your money? The only reason would be greed.

      Not quite understanding how cheques work is also a possible reason. Few people use cheques nowadays, so a lot of people won't have any experience with them, and might think it's the cheque itself that's worth something.

      Ofcourse even then simply sending the cheque back makes more sense, but a lot of people just aren't very logical thinkers.

    152. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a trap!

    153. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by zotz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "#2 is a little more understandable since people tend to trust people in uniform, but giving anyone the kind of information they would need to steal your identity is just foolish unless you initiated the interaction yourself (say, by calling the gas company directly)."

      Perhaps, but what is truly foolish is to set up the system where an identity can be stolen with such easily obtained information.

      all the best,

      drew

      --
      FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
    154. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by hvm2hvm · · Score: 1

      I think an important concept that people should understand is that victims shouldn't be exempt from guilt just because they are victims. Just like a pedestrian hit by a car can be held responsible if he/she didn't cross on a designated place or didn't watch what he/she was doing.

      --
      ics
    155. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by arelas · · Score: 1

      It's not always that clear. I had a friend who used an online dating service. He exchanged serveral emails spaning a few weeks time with a "woman" he had made contact with. My friend was lonely and hopeless at the time and this person said all the right things. Before long the scammer sprung the trap and requested $500 to pay for a plane ticket to come see him. She had an itinerary set up with the airlines that he could check online and everything. So, he unwittingly sent the money. Of course it turns out this "woman" was a gold trader from Nigeria. Needless to say he never heard from the girl or saw his money again. A normally intelligent guy made a stupid mistake out of loneliness which the scammer preyed on. There was no greed involved. Punish the criminal....the victim has been punished enough for their stupidity.

    156. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 1

      I disagree in this particular case. Typically, the people who get ripped off are a very small percentage of the people who receive the scam email due to the wonders of spam. Therefore, reporting should not be hindered. However, actual calculation of losses might become a problem.

    157. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by zotz · · Score: 1

      There ya go!

      A 110% tax rate on illegal income perhaps?

      all the best,

      drew

      --
      FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
    158. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by hal2814 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A better scam that's similar to #1 is one of the work from home scams. You sign up for a work from home service and they set up direct deposit for you. Before you even start working, you notice they already deposited $3500. They tell you it's a mistake and have you wire $3000 of it back out but let you keep $500 as your first paycheck. Your work from home profession? A money launderer. The bank will take all $3500 back out and you can explain to law enforcement why money illegally wired from another account ended up in your account and then went overseas. If you paid attention, you'd notice that the account sending in money was not the same one as the account you wired money to.

    159. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 1

      The median is an average. You're thinking of mean.

    160. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

      Hmm... well, that depends, some of these scams play oddly with a persons sense of right and wrong. For instance, a while back I got a typical Nigerian scam letter from someone pretending to be Yassar Arafat's widow, who, the Email claimed, was trying to steal money from the PLO. That was pretty smart (the theatricality of the 419 scam occaisionally impresses me), because a lot of people in America probably would see that not only as not a crime, but a good thing to do, depriving the PLO of money. of course, I think that some people might be afraid to steal money from the PLO, so I think that was a problem, but they probably still got some people on their hook.

      As to greed, meh, I suspect most of the people falling for these things are relatively poor. I mean, if you can get scammed by 419, what are the chances that the credit card companies, cash advance companies, adjustable rate mortgage banks, Dell computer (watch out for "deferred interest") or one of the many other legal scam artists in this country haven't gotten to you first? Heck, even a simple cash advance company is a lot more sophisticated in their scams than the typical 419 scam.

      Stupid, yeah, but if people weren't stupid there would be no state lotteries. The sad thing is almost every time I explain the odds of the state lottery to someone, they say, "Well, someones going to win." People just want to believe that they have some social mobility, which most people don't have and never will.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    161. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Exactly right. Bust em all for attempted wire fraud to start with and go from there."

      And then why, exactly, would they come forward to report they've been scammed?

      "We have to get serious about stopping this crap."

      By punishing the people who come forward to report it?

      I'll grant you that your plan will lower the reported frequency of the crime. That always looks good for elections and the like.

      (Not that I agree with with the parent's assertion that the victim's role in the classic Nigerian scam is a financial crime. Mob accountants skate on far thinner ice and still manage to stay legit, de jure if not de facto.)

    162. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, the best way to respond to #2 is to tell them you'll contact the gas company directly...

      Aside from that, there are multiple gas suppliers here, it's funny when such a scammer gets the company wrong. Some of them also turn up claiming to work for a rival company and trying to get you to sign up to their service instead of the one you already use. Some of these are genuine (but still shady) salesmen, while some are out and out frauds...

      I have had some pretty nasty salesmen recently, they turn up trying to get me to sign up to some kind of supposedly "cheaper" service, and then either respond with derision or downright insults about how "stupid" i must be to keep using my "expensive" provider.
      And most of the time their offers aren't actually cheaper, they simply have the costs more hidden, like the per unit charge for gas will be lower, but that only applies to the first X units after which it is higher, and the service charge is much higher too.

      But a good way to get rid of the salesmen trying to sell you home broadband, is to ask for things like ipv6... Some will downright lie and claim they can supply it, but none will be willing to put it down in writing.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    163. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Yes but the way the media portraits all the rich people and government officials they all seem to do some financial fraud and tax evasions etc... To make their money. So many people actually think that is how it needs to get done, and once they are rich the laws will no longer apply. Besides many of the laws they are breaking are going into the "complex law" category. Where if you do it one way it is perfectly legal if you do it an other way then it is illegal. And if the person is dumb enough to fall for the scam do you really expect them to understand the law to that detail.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    164. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by VdG · · Score: 1

      I think it's more that they don't quite understand the clearing process. Most people think that once a cheque has cleared the money's in their account for good and aren't aware that their bank can take it back later - with no time limit. The banks haven't gone out of their way to make that clear, either.

    165. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Grismar · · Score: 1

      No kidding... neither am, I but this is pretty basic stuff here. How does something like that earn +5 insightful??

      The use of nice bold headings, a numbered list and proper quoting earned them 4 points. The last point was scored by answering their own question for the lazy /. crowd.

    166. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

      Just because the scam is old doesn't mean everyone has heard of it. Ignorance and stupidity are two different things. Nobody deserves to be drfrauded, burglarized, robbed, or cheated.

      These Nigerian government asshats sound like some of the asshats running our governments here when it comes to prostitution. It's like using a steak to defraud a starving man. Some of these girls will pick up vulnerable elderly widowers and drain their bank accounts dry, yet the governmet asshats paint the whores as victims. What is it about people who want to go into politics worldwide that make them think like that?

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    167. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Entrapment is when a law enforcement official convinces you to break the law. If a drug dealer walks up to you on the street and convinces you to buy a kilo of heroin, you're going to jail buddy."

      Mobsters beating up shopkeeper for protection money: very naughty.
      Shopkeeper not paying protection money: exactly as naughty.

    168. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by grandpa-geek · · Score: 1

      I recall hearing that in an early instance of this scam the messages were sent by Pony Express.

    169. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A crime can't get any more "victimless" than that - the victim is a fictional character!

      With true victimless "crimes" where there's not even a fictional victim. I'd say that's more "victimless". Of course people claim the victim is society. Awwww, poor society.

    170. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

      I believe the stereotype is that the British drink it warm, but I don't know if that's true.

      That's not a stereotype. It was the worst beer I ever had, while in transit in the Heathrow Airport.
      I think they do it in order to make the experience of drinking piss more accurate. God knows the taste is already there.

    171. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by c · · Score: 1

      > the last thing you want in this world are fools with economic power.

      Phew... Good thing the fools are being kept distracted with all that military power...

      c.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    172. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I guess it's the same reason people fall for all scams: they let their greed get in the way of their common sense.

      I think more often it's not greed, but hunger. The rich don't usually fall for those scams.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    173. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      #2 has been replaced with a "gas lock in program". Lock in low rates right now, can we see your last gas bill and your drivers license?

      I get those scammers all over the neighborhood every fall.

      They freak out on you when you say, "I pay it all online I dont get a gas bill."

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    174. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by kwendakabisaa · · Score: 1

      A fool and his money are soon parted...

      That'd make a good slogan:

      "Nigeria... parting fools from their money since 1992"

      I have seen something similar on Slashdot pin 2005 about a Nigerian song. At that time a song by actor/comedian Nkem Owoh (popularly known as Osuofia) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ktz7vc70hZ8) had become the number one hit in Nigeria even though it did not get any airtime coverage. The lyrics:
      "419 is just a game, you are the losers, we are the winners.
      White people are greedy, I can say they are greedy
      White men, I will eat your dollars, will take your money and disappear.
      419 is just a game, we are the masters, you are the losers.
      419 is just a game
      I go chop your dollars
      419 is just a game
      I go chop your dollars
      No one feel sorry for rich white men who are greedy
      their government will reward them, not the needy
      they would do the same
      if they only knew the game
      it is the fool that pity him and not his own family
      419 is just a game, we are the winners, whitey is the loser
      In this there can be no shame, time to live it up, my brothers
      We've found the goose that laid the golden egg, let's use it
      419 is just the game, and Maghas are greedy, sick, and stupid.
      419 is just a game
      I go chop your dollars
      419 is just a game
      I go chop your dollars
      419 is just a game
      I go chop your dollars 419 is just a game
      I go chop your dollars"

    175. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you mind if I ask what country you reside in?

    176. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Actually smart people will frame the fake check and put it on their wall.

      And then I sent them a big fat envelope with $5000.00 in monopoly money and a letter stating, " all the bank has was canadian currency, sorry."

      IT was fun. I just wish I could buy bank dye packs that would go off when the envelope was opened.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    177. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      "It's immoral to let a sucker keep his money." - Canada Bill Jones, 19th century poker player

      Yeah, take a lesson in morality from a man with no morals, that's real smart!

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    178. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      Well I'm covered then.

      1) I'll happily inform them I voided the check and so saved us all a lot of trouble.

      2) There are no gas lines on my street. So I'd ask them to wait outside while I got my bill, and then I'd go inside and call 911.

    179. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go back to digg, idiot.

    180. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question was

      ...what difference does it make whether the person at the other end is a scamster or an undercover cop conducting a sting?

      Thanks for answering it again.

    181. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Arccot · · Score: 1

      If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom. I don't know if it's as clear cut as that. Typically the victims of this scam agree to break the law in some way, in some cases to participate in committing a massive financial fraud.

      I agree that it's not unbelievable, but arresting the victims in this case will just make them more likely to not come forward. Kind of like deporting sexually abused illegal aliens.

      On a lesser scale, of course.

    182. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by gnick · · Score: 1

      1: Entrapment is when a law enforcement official convinces you to break the law. If a drug dealer walks up to you on the street and convinces you to buy a kilo of heroin, you're going to jail buddy.

      I agree entirely. I brought up entrapment as one of the differences between having a cop on the other end vice a scammer.

      2: Making a habit out of something is irrelevant. In fact, a person's history of criminality is inadmissible as evidence for or against them (thanks to the Constitution, I think). It may be used in determining their punishment if convicted, but not in determining their guilt. Only evidence relating to their current trial is admissible for that. That said, records of their communications directly related to the current trial are most certainly admissible, and the police would no doubt get a warrant to obtain that obvious source of information.

      I brought up making a habit out of it as a means of law enforcement obtaining a warrant. It's entirely relevant. If you are a regular fraudster, law enforcement has a much easier time getting a warrant to snoop on you than if you've never committed a crime. Did you even read my post before responding?

      Pretty basic stuff here. How does something like that earn +5 Insightful??

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    183. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by fredrated · · Score: 1

      I've always wondered, where did the fool get his money to begin with?

    184. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by gnick · · Score: 1

      1) The victim was actively pursued and persuaded to take part in the illegal activity. That sounds a helluva lot like entrapment.

      It's only entrapment if it's the police doing it. If a criminal pursues you and persuades you do commit a crime, you're going to jail.

      Exactly. That's why I brought up entrapment as one of the differences between having a cop on the other end instead of a scammer.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    185. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Damnit on number 2 there!

      I knew something was fishy when the guy from the gas company started rummaging through my wifes underwear drawer.

    186. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by box4831 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, we're working on that. - US Government

      ;)

      --
      Miller Lite tastes like water that's somehow managed to rot.
    187. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I've actually seen a typical Nigerian scam sent, internationally, via regular post, in a rather large envelope.

      It seemed like a rather dubious plan for making a profit on their part: I'm not sure if they had some targeted list, but considering the price they were paying for posting them, it would have required a considerable catch rate and a large amount from each victim.

      Of course, this could explain why I've only seen one...

    188. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by studog-slashdot · · Score: 1

      2: Making a habit out of something is irrelevant. In fact, a person's history of criminality is inadmissible as evidence for or against them (thanks to the Constitution, I think).

      Not according to several US crimes shows I've watched on TV! If you have a pattern of behaviour, past related acts are admissible to establish said pattern to the jury.

      ...Stu, IANAL, but I watch them on TV all the time...

    189. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by DrHyde · · Score: 1

      You're missing something. That is that once mail is delivered to my letter box, it is behind my front door. So to read even the front of it they need to break in.

    190. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by edbob · · Score: 1

      It was pretty funny when they tried the "gas bill" scam on my a few years ago. Since my house was all-electric and had no gas hook up, it seemed a bit fishy that the gas company would send people around. While they were waiting for me to retrieve my bill, I called the police.

    191. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sjames · · Score: 1

      the part that makes all of them unbelievable is that your email address should not be known to them, nobody in such a position would normally contact a random stranger whose email address was generated by psychic means.

      I suppose, like all spam, they rely on sending out millions so they only need a hundredth of a percent to actually believe them in order to make a really good living.

    192. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by MPAB · · Score: 1

      Rejected. This is Slashdot. We only accept car analogies here.

    193. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Thelasko · · Score: 3, Informative

      Most Nigerian 419 scams are a variant of a much older scam known as the Spanish Prisoner. It dates back to the early 1900s.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    194. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Why is it dishonest? Is it dishonest to claim an offered reward for returning lost property? The only fault with these people is ignorance about banking. I had no idea that banks could revoke money after the check has "cleared".

    195. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr_Perl · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I received a brown wax-paper envelope from Nigeria in the early 90s with such a scam enclosed. It was quite a curiosity back then as I'd never recieved anything from Africa, and it also was quite a bit more literate than the email variety. I knew right away it was a scam though I didn't understand the mechanism entirely, so I briefly mused about setting up an empty "deposit only" bank account for the promised "deposit" just to see what would happen.

      I suspect that the investment in the postage made the need to be more professional more important, and thus the scam worked better, now the costs to send are low and the returns can be as well.

      Plus I suppose you're more sure to get a genuine idiot if you use crappy grammar and spelling and they still bite.

      --

      My poetry site welcomes the unusual.
    196. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Put the threat of jail time for even TRYING to hook up with the "Nigerean minister of finance" and we might take a bite outta crime.

      Come on, everyone who's ever heard of the Nigerian scams knows for a fact that General Kabuto doesn't really want to give them $15 MILLION USD. The problem is the people who are truly ignorant. If they haven't heard of this scam, what makes you think they'll hear of this "threat"? What we need is a public service announcement during American Idol or something.

    197. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      Warm larger? Are you mad, or British?

      Why is it that people take the piss out of the British for drinking "warm" beer but not the French for drinking "warm" wine? White vs. red wine - lager vs. bitter. Chill one, not the other. Same principle. How hard can it be?

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    198. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by MPAB · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up!
      Perhaps the only case where the identity fraud does not apply is when the victim is told to be the only link found between a certain Mr. Smith (dead in a plane accident) and his bank account.
      OTOH, the victim may play as a legitimate partner for the scammer and in doing so not commiting identity fraud, but it would still be a fiscal fraud.

    199. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      As long as whoever comes out ahead with the money classifies it as 'Illegal Income' when filing his/her tax returns at the end of the year, I'm fine with whatever.

      Any competent grifter (A.K.A. tax accountant) knows you report it as "Fifth Amendment."

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    200. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Sure you can.

      $Honest_Man sells you a $100 widget for $100. You take widget, then cancel check/dispute payment. You get widget, $Honest_Man gets nothing.

    201. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Most of the advance fee scams are asking the victim to be party to a fraud themselves.

      "This money doesn't belong to you and we both know it. If you give me a way to launder it out of the country I'll split it with you."

      Sound familiar? That's the 419 scam I've been receiving for the last ten years. If you're burned by your partner in crime, you're still a criminal.

    202. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by arthurpaliden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually they have been around since at least the 1700's when the masses learned to read and write.

      As to the point about charging the ones getting caught. They should be charged with conspericy to commint a crime since that is what they are usually agreeing to do.

    203. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by glgraca · · Score: 1

      People who fall for these scams are not only dumb, they are also greedy. The best scams are the ones that make people feel like they have the upper hand. So I don't think that these people are entirely without fault. After all, they did agree to play part in a crime.

    204. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      IANAL so I don't know how it works but I since a crime didn't occur can you really be arrested for thinking what you're doing is illegal?

      Even if you did think you were helping to launder money since you we're what crime would they charge you with?

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    205. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

      "Only people who want "something for nothing" are going to go for this kind of fraud"

      Watch "No Country for Old Men". It's awesome.

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    206. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Dirtside · · Score: 1

      The Nigerian scam is just a variation on the Spanish Prisoner scam: help me out with a little bit of money in order to make available a large amount of money which I will give you some fraction of (although the fraction still dwarfs the amount you'll potentially spend). In the Spanish Prisoner, the money is to secure the release of some noble who will reward you; in the Nigerian scam, the money is to secure access to a large bank account from which you will be rewarded.

      More to the point, the Spanish Prisoner scam dates back several centuries. :)

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    207. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      Well, for one everyone drinks red wine.

      And secondly 'grabbing a cold brewski' is central to American living since the advent of refigeration (perhaps cause it's much hotter in summer here). It is not possible to find warm beer here, ergo, warm beer is seen as strange and disgusting.

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    208. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      Not anymore, since all major American breweries are now foreign owned.

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    209. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Another variation on #1 is that they buy something from you and overpay with a bank draft from a foreign bank, asking you to send the difference to their "shipping agent" so they can avoid a double fee. It's all designed to make you feel like there is no risk - people trust bank drafts more than they do personal cheques, but in reality a bank draft can also be reversed weeks later when the originating bank gets the original and discovers it was forged or stolen. You also don't have to send the shipping agent any money until the bank draft "clears", and you don't have to send the goods until you get instructions from the shipping agent (which never come, to avoid leaving a trail to the fraudster - any contact with the shipping agent is through a temporary mail drop).

    210. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      I was served lukewarm beer several times in England.

      Wasn't bad, but I couldn't drink it as fast as I could a cold one.

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    211. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by glgraca · · Score: 1

      A bit offtopic, but I find it amusing how Brazil's banking system is so much more advanced than the US's. In Brazil all banks are interconnected electronically and checks are cleared in a day (for those few who still use them!).

    212. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by rosvall · · Score: 1

      Except, of course, if you're Nigerian.

    213. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      It was the worst beer I ever had, while in transit in the Heathrow Airport.

      First: proper beer comes out of those big hand pumps that give barmaids good biceps. If it goes "whirrr" and comes out under pressure, don't drink it.

      Second: although a naive person might think a major international airport should be a welcoming beacon of hospitality, showcasing the best that the host country had to offer, and leaving those just passing through with a pang of regret that they could not have stayed longer, Heathrow airport is designed to make you want to piss off back home ASAP, and (as you discovered) will even provide the piss (probably at about 4 quid a pint).

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    214. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      In the rest of the world, where puritan crazies weren't allowed in government, this never happened, and so it is accepted that beer is drunk at around room temperature, while lager is drunk slightly chilled.

      Call my country's forefathers putitan crazies, but on a hot day, damn nothing beats an ice cold coors light or corona, chilled within .01 degrees of its freezing point...

      --
      music lover since 1969
    215. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by bograt · · Score: 1

      And one more: "buddy" is American for "mate".

    216. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seem to remember something like #1, only it wasn't a scam. It was one of those things that have THIS IS NOT A CHECK* written on it, that the guy decided to try and deposit just for shits'n'giggles. Long story short, the guy then put it into a bank certificate or something after it actually cleared and then placed that inside a security box at the same bank, but it seemed to me that even if he hadn't done that, they wouldn't have been able to legally remove that money from his account. I don't remember the exact details but I thought I saw something about it on /. a while back. Maybe someone else who knows what I'm talking about and what scam the Parent is talking about can provide some insight into how they differ.

      *Offtopic, but I never understood the difference between check and cheque. I've always written them as checks.

    217. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My babysitter got scammed in the parking lot of a grocery store for quite a bit of money (in 1972) - a lot of it has to do with the scammer bypassing skepticism of the scammee. In the old days an honest face was the most common tool.

      Today, people "connect" through common messages in e-mails, really trusting people who haven't taken to heart the concept that the printed word can come from any person's fingers...

    218. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      And if my losing my house, savings, and freedom would prevent those million losses of life in Iraq, that might be a compelling argument. But it won't. Even if 100 percent of my income went to taxes, it would still be an utterly insignificant fraction of the war budget.

      You would need a very high percentage of the country to stop paying their taxes to actually affect the war funding, so the real comparison is a couple of hundred million people imprisoned and reduced to abject poverty vs. a million lost lives, and that isn't as clear cut.

      Even if that were possible (there are plenty of people who still support the damn thing), the government isn't like your deadbeat roommate, who if you don't give him money for beer will just have to go without. The government already runs at a deficit, spending money that they don't have. The whole Iraq war to date has been largely funded by simply throwing the notion of a balanced budget out the window and growing the national debt. In a very real way, it isn't my tax dollars paying for it at all -- it's paid for with money that the government borrowed or invented.

      Ruining your life for a symbolic gesture that will have no effect on the rest of the world isn't "taking action" -- it's just being an idiot.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    219. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm hitting on Winnie The Pooh in a chat room right now. Great, it is actually a cop from Keene NH. Damn "honey pots"!

    220. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by JJNess · · Score: 1

      "You'll never con an honest John" - Mike Skinner, The Streets

    221. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While we're at it we should just outlaw every dumb thing that people could ever do...And we should put video recorders in all their houses so we can make sure their following the law... And we should jail them if they think about doing something illegal... hmm what could we call that?! How about thought-crime! Oh man that's perfect, we could also set up a figurehead with a nice calm voice to help coo the people into not doing anything stupid... Man this idea gets better all the time!

    222. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      well then it's like meeting and arranging to have sex with a minor on the internet then drive your car there and find out it was actually a sting operation.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    223. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Let's be clear here. Most people wouldn't mind getting something for nothing if it happened. It's greedy people who actually seek getting something for nothing. Being happy with the amount of an inheritance or finding a Picasso in your attic don't imply greed. Being glad someone died to provide you the inheritance or stealing a painting does.

    224. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      They should jail the Nigerian commisioner in question.

      Some nice leg irons and a big cast iron ball should about do it.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    225. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by arth1 · · Score: 1

      I see it as evolution in action: Girls like guys with $ (or so the legend goes ;) ), guys want more $, guys participate in scam, loses $, is less likely to procreate because girls no longer want them.

      Unfortunately for your theory, there's a correlation between poverty and prolificacy. The poorer you get, the more likely you are to become a parent, and the more numerous your offspring.

      This is due to many factors, including (but not limited to) a correlation between poverty and religions that advocate prolificacy, the cost of prophylactics, and children as a pension plan.

    226. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This appears to be a cultural difference. Many single-unit houses and small apartment buildings in the US have a receptacle at the curb or next to the front door that holds the mail. Some people have slots and big apartment complexes have locking boxes, but many people step outside and open an unlocked door to get their mail.

    227. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 1

      they act all neighbourly and hand you your mail as if they're being kind

      I'm pretty sure that getting someone's mail out of their mailbox is a federal offense.

      --
      Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman
    228. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Or even do a $25 stop payment on the check, rather than paying someone $500 to send the check back. (This post is, of course, assuming it's not a scam, even though it obviously is.)

    229. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Congress?

    230. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Maybe locally. There's no way one fool could afford a national election in the US. That means one fool has to convince a bunch of other fools to part with their money to get him elected.

    231. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Samah · · Score: 1

      Ah nice pointer there. There's a guy in my guild who doesn't get the joke when the Aussies laugh at him for saying "rooting" for a team.

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    232. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jschimpf · · Score: 1

      Where I worked then (1992) we got letters from Nigeria with the 419 scams. The advantage then was you got some cool stamps.

    233. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Rummaging around in someone else's mailbox isn't being neighborly.

      It's bound to get you shot in some places.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    234. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by bograt · · Score: 1

      Ha. Getting way off topic here, but did you know there's a Canadian clothing retailer called "Roots"? It's stores for children's clothes are called "Roots Kids".

    235. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother? I'm not the one posting as AC.

      Because you are not anonymous and even link to a homepage. Ergo, your blowhard stupidity will be forever linked to your person.

    236. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by BroncoInCalifornia · · Score: 1

      And before that, they used the african swallow.

      And what is the airspeed of these swallows?

      --

      Religion is the main cause of atheism.

    237. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

      I don't know how many quids I paid, but I remember giving the lady euros and getting change back in coins that look funny when squished under a train.

      But your point is taken. I'll reserve my judgement on british beer until I can get to one of those british pubs for some fish n' chips.

      Oh, and I like some beer from the pressure tap. If someone offers you wheat beer from tap (any kind), though, ask for a glass of water because at that place they don't serve beer.

    238. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by DarkProphet · · Score: 1

      That's bullshit. People that hungry are already on the county's teat anyway. I don't see them sending that money to the county to repay their burden. Its greed pure and simple.

      --
      What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
    239. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by HubHikari · · Score: 1

      And before that, they used the african swallow.

      Wouldn't they get better airspeed using a European swallow?

    240. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Alsn · · Score: 1

      The lottery?

    241. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      i think it's more cause most americans drink lager, and warm lager, especially rice and corn laden american megabrew, is disgusting at any temp much higher than freezing. Bitter (for example) also has much more intense flavors than the average beer palate is used to when served at proper temp.

      Same thing (generally) with wine--lots of people prefer chilled (with an icecube in the glass even, ugh) white or blush wine because it's more palatable, as opposed to say, a tannic monster of a red.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    242. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      The difference is that fraud is inherently criminal and consumption of psychoactive substances by adults who are competent of thought is not.

      No third party is hurt by a peaceful sale of a drug from one party to another. Acts surrounding the drug trade such as robbery, gang wars over sales areas, theft for purchasing the drugs, and selling contaminated drugs are separate issues and could still be prosecuted even if the purchase and sale of the drugs themselves was legal. Outlawing the possession, use, purchase, and sale of certain drugs based on what may happen is applying guilt by association. Overdoses are not something every user experiences, and it's in fact possible to overdose on most legal drugs. This includes most over-the-counter drugs. "Use only as directed" on the product's packaging can even be an issue in court. A legal, regulated market for drugs that are not inherently harmful could actually cut down on many of the associated crimes. Some drugs are inherently harmful, such as the backyard lab crystal meth that's such a bother. Most illicit drugs, though, are only unsafe above a particular dosage or if they are contaminated. The dosage and purity would be easier to control in a regulated and taxed legal pharmacy.

      Claiming to be the next of kin for Mr. Obalage Umundo (a name I actually received recently in a 419 scam) when you're not so that the abandoned property laws of some nation are broken is a crime. You're defrauding someone, and conspiring to do so. That you in turn get defrauded by the prime mover in the fraud is to be expected, because the original fraud wasn't real from the start. Even if the original fraud was real, why would anyone expect a fraudster to honestly split the money with them? There may be honor among some sorts of thieves, but you'll never find it among con artists.

      So, is getting ripped off while trying to rip someone else off necessarily dishonest? Does it intentionally cause harm to the third party? Yes, if the original fraud is real and works.

      Is smoking a joint, eating some twinkies, and going to sleep for 12 hours necessarily dishonest or harmful to some third party? No, not at all. Is smoking a joint that you stole money to buy harmful to a third party? No. The theft is what's harmful. Is having a drink at age 20 instead of 21 going to kill people? No. Could having some drinks then driving a car while drunk kill people no matter the age of the drinker? Yes.

      That's the difference. Trying to defraud someone is inherently a crime. It's an attempt to hurt someone for your benefit.

      Snorting a line of cocaine so you can work late tonight hurts nobody else. If there are illegal acts tied to the production, distribution, or sales activities of the drug other than the actual sale, those activities would be illegal anyway. Outlawing the possession, production, sale, and use of cocaine doesn't keep anyone from being hurt other than by their own use of the drug. It's supposed to cut down on the crimes associated with the drug use and distribution, but that appears not to be working so well.

      Drugs are a fungible resource, like oil. By outlawing the sale of a drug people are taking, you're not stopping the flow. You're raising the price and therefore the reward for breaking the embargo. You're taking the supply chain out of the hands of law-abiding citizens and making it profitable enough that it's a strong lure for those willing to do illegal things to make a buck.

      Hell, criminals themselves are a fungible resource. If cocaine, marijuana, hashish, and opium were legal tomorrow the criminal syndicates that smuggle them would find other crimes. They're not smuggling, killing, bribing, and shooting people because they have a vested interest in seeing people get high. They'll commit whichever crimes they are able to commit which give them the best return. If you want to cut down on crime, cut down on criminals and their motivations. Don't make users criminals so that they won't complain to the police when the dealers short them or give them poisonous product.

      Is that a big enough difference for you?

    243. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Why aren't you reporting the attempted scams? If you count on people stupid enough to fall for them to be smart enough to report them, then you're helping the problem continue. If you are reporting them, then they're getting reported as attempts. What's the problem?

    244. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Okay. Is a car insurance analogy close enough?

      It's like agreeing to buy somebody a car bumper after an accident so they can put it on themselves and put in an accident claim but keep the money, which they will split with you. Only there's no car, no bumper, and they just keep your cash for the bumper instead of defrauding the insurance company.

      If that's not close enough, how about this: You agree to buy your new "friend" a paint job for his putty-bodied car so he can sell it as good condition without disclosing the awful shape it's actually in. He in turn agrees to split the higher sales price with you. Instead, he takes the money for the "paint job" and keeps it, then goes down the street and uses the same story again.

    245. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      It's Friday, I ain't got shit to do, I'll defend Firehed. He is correct; you, Mr. AC, are an idiot. Firehed objected to the statement "By definition, a large percentage of the population is stupid". That is not at all the definition of stupid; it is possible (admittedly unlikely) that there could be a point in time where every single member of the population is what we consider "smart". Firehed then goes on to discuss what Detritus perhaps meant, i.e., by definition a large percentage of the population is below average intelligence. To be pedantic, even that is not quite true; given a population where everyone was exactly equal in intelligence, no one would be above or below average. But for all practical purposes, it is true enough.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    246. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      fake crime he thinks is a real crime but really acts on != real crime he only thinks he's committing

      One is not a crime, and therefore is not a crime to act on. The other is a crime and therefore is a crime to act on.

      Conspiring to commit a crime is a crime. Conspiring to go to the cinema with your friends to watch a movie is not a crime (well, unless you live somewhere that watching a certain movie is a criminal act).

    247. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      You, sir, are an idiot. Trying to rape a child is trying to rape a child. It's a real child the human failure is trying to rape, not the FBI agent.

    248. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point he was trying to make is that anyone who considers the issue rationally would realize that "accidentally" sending a check somewhere doesn't mean your money is gone, all that person would need to do is void the check by number and issue a new one to the "correct" recipient.

      Not necessarily. If I'm using some form of guarenteed funds (eg. a Cashier's Check), then as soon as I recieve the check, the money is taken out of my account. If I lose that check, then it'll be a real ordeal to get my money back (if I ever get it back).

    249. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Which is exactly the point. Why out of millions do they pick you, who they say is their only contact based on your upstanding reputation? Clearly they actually are contacting many more people, but to believe the scam you must believe they aren't.

    250. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Close. Bose are both crappy and expensive. That's what makes it so easy to dress other crappy ones to look expensive -- just throw a Bose label on them.

    251. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      Fools and their money are soon parted but it's good to keep up with the scams so that we can be less foolish.

      No way. Uh-uh. I can't be a fool. Other people are fools, and I laugh at them. Saying that I could become a fool at one time or another, well, it shakes my outlook on the world to the very core! Next you'll be inferring that there isn't a clean dichotomy between fools and us superior beings!

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    252. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

      Actually I think it's what they call "conspiracy to commit [crime X]". It's illegal to launder money, it's also illegal to conspire to launder money. So whether they actually laundered any money isn't the point. They conspired to do it. So the Nigerian ambassador is right. All those suckers are criminals as well as victims. But I don't want to see them in prison. I pay enough in taxes now, I don't need to be giving these people 3 square a day and a roof over their heads. A box in an alley is good en ough for them.

    253. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      There's a reason Robin Hood is such a beloved romantic figure. Steal from the rich and give to the poor indeed.

    254. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      I submit, as evidence of scams dating back a good long ways, the simple existence of the following phrase: caveat emptor.

    255. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Thinking about it and attempting to do it are two very different things. One is a thought, as you say. An attempt is an actual act that failed.

    256. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is dishonest. An honest person would throw the cheque away.

      The owner of the check tells you to cash it. How is that dishonest? You seem to be confusing "wrong" or "immoral" or some other subjective measure with the objective "dishonest." The person that cashes the check never lies, never cheats, and never takes more than what is offered first by someone else. That can't be dishonest, even if you otherwise look down upon their actions.

      I would describe such a person as "selfish" and "greedy", not "nice".

      Fine, call them all those things. But don't call them dishonest, as that's an incorrect characterization.

    257. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jadavis · · Score: 1

      I think this is more to the point. People have an idea that certain information is sensitive, like SSNs, credit card numbers, and a few other things.

      But most people think "Gas bill? Sure, why not? I don't care if you know that I spend $4.54 more per month than my neighbor."

      Another important difference is that there's no greed involved here. It's just a natural desire to help people get their job done without hassle.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
    258. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      By "hunger" I don't necessarily mean food. However, in the US the poor are forced to work to get benefits of any kind, including food stamps. It isn't the poor who are at the government's teat, it's their greedy, stingy employers who won't pay a living wage. Food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit are an indirect subsidy to McDonalds and Wal Mart. The way the poor are treated in the US is a stain on society and a moral outrage.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    259. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Actually, in the "take this money we stole during the civil war" and "take the money of this man who died before a real family member does" varieties, the scammers probably justify it to themselves that they are only scamming other scammers and not honest folk.

    260. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      I can't tell if you're writing in the voice of an Australian, Irishman, or merely a very confused cowboy.

    261. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      That's a sad story and your friend was a victim blinded by his loneliness and desperation. That's sad, but your friend isn't guilty of anything other than a (hopefully temporary) lack of judgment

      That's not the same as the victims this guy wants jailed. Many of these scams involve attempts at fraud or theft, laundering money from fraud or theft, impersonating people, lying on official documents, complicity with those action, and other crimes by the mark. The mark then gets taken by the scammer, who the mark thought was going to be a partner in some other crime.

      There's a world of difference. This is more like the "woman" your friend was conned by being conned into defrauding your friend by someone else. Given that scenario, she would be conned, but she was conned because she was willing to con your friend.

    262. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think George Orwell established firmly that even thinking about committing a crime is the same as committing one; if you don't believe that George, than how about the American President? Hail to the chief, baby.

      You can also use AT&T and the NSA as prime examples of Orwellian philosophy. Remember when this was all just literature?

    263. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      No, they don't deserve to lose their money.

      As far as I'm concerned, the ones who agree to commit some sort of fraud as part of their "victim" role in the scam certainly do. Keep in mind that many of these scams require some very questionable activity (e.g. agreeing to participate in a money laundering operation to get a cut of it) on the part of their "victims." Not only were they stupid enough to fall for the scam, but they were greedy and unethical enough to ostensibly commit a crime in the process. No sympathy here for ANY the participants of those sorts of scams.

    264. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Atlantis-Rising · · Score: 1

      The solution to #1 is to cash the cheque, refuse to wire back the money, and dump the money into a high-interest savings account. The bank'll grab back the $3500, but you get to keep the interest.

      --
      "It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
    265. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1

      I remember seeing a mailed letter like this that my parents got while I was growing up. I don't know how young I was, but it was probably in the early 90s.

    266. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sjames · · Score: 1

      Exactly right. And MY point is that it's not surprising they can find enough marks when they have so many millions of people to try.

    267. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Miang · · Score: 1

      No, SidewaysPineTree was correct. The median is a measure of central tendency (as is the mean), but 'mean' is another word for average, 'median' isn't.

      And by the definition of median (the data point in the middle when all the data are ordered), 50% of the population is below the median. 50% of the population is only below the mean when you have perfectly symmetrically distributed data, which happens not nearly as often as most analysts would like. ;-)

    268. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by kenj0418 · · Score: 1

      A more modern example of #1 is where someone is selling something (via ebay, craigslist, etc), and get a potential buyer who says thay have send a check for $3500 because its coming from their investment account and thats the smallest check they are allowed to right (or some other similar reason). They then say, just wait until the bank clears the check and then send back the difference (lets say $3000).

      Scam proceeds as above - at the end victim is out their $3000 - plus whatever they were selling- plus whatever the bank does to them.

      In this case the victim isn't being a weasel -- just gullible.

      A friend of mine was almost scammed a couple weeks ago with this - but at least she had the sense to ask me if I thought anything was fishy here.

    269. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by digitrev · · Score: 1

      Fully loaded. Although, to be fair, they tended to sober up on the way in.

      --
      Cynical Idealist
    270. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by richmaine · · Score: 1

      There are many variants of #1. The basic element is that, for just about any reason, they send you a check and ask for you to deposit it and send part of it back. Within that framework, the variants are wide.

      I've personally seen several cases of one variant. My wife runs a math tutoring center. A "prospective client" contacts us by email to arrange tutoring for his son, who will be in the US a few months (allegedly from the UK). They propose to pay in advance for the tutoring... and also to include extra funds that we are supposed to forward to some "relative" who will be using them for... whatever... the latest one was for the plane ticket back.

      We've gotten 2 of these, and other tutoring centers in the same chain also report getting them. No, we didn't fall for them.

    271. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Salamande · · Score: 1

      Patrick Combs. Pretty funny story. Even got a Broadway play out of it.

    272. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regarding consequences for #1, not only will you be out of money for cashing a fake check, but you may have to do jail time: http://www.kirotv.com/consumer/16091642/detail.html

    273. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      until I can get to one of those british pubs for some fish n' chips.

      Well, pubs are increasingly moving into food, but more traditional would be to go to a pub and drink several pints of beer - this will leave you feeling inexplicably hungry and ready to visit a fish'n'chip shop or an Indian restaurant. I'd recommend the latter - I've never found a decent curry in the US.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    274. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In regards to Australians commenting on Nigerian accounts- it should be noted that the scams involve legitimate sweepsstakes and e-mail lotteries which have claim representatives which are defrauding the claimants rights due to their own political preferences to fund the South African CBN, which has some workers in it that try to perpetrate fraud in the handling of the foreign invested funds from the claim representatives for Internationally questionable purposes., including collusion to leave the country after copying the bank files. This is not all it seems- as would fit a scam. A scam is a illegal complicity based on a compliant act or acts which are intended to take money without further verifications. What I can see here is reports from The FBI indicating that a South African Bank had requested verification of purported signed documents for release of another individuals funds from that seperate individual's account with them., and that bank admiting they refused to release such funds until the account holder willfully showed up in person in order to make the request of funds to be released. Spain also is a bad deal for lottery winners due to their own policy of withholding foreign winning accounts and the default mechanism of the government to claim such funds after legal claim is filed. Maybe your Countries should look into how many victims are verifiable to the U.N., and what the United Nations have offered those individuals for substitutional reimbursement.,always much less than the original amount won in a lottery anyway. Of course their are obvious scams which actually turn out to be legal inheritance, but those take such a long time to verify and the barristers like to keep most of that money for over a year anyway.Call it for what it is- private imposition upon the civil rights of private citizens, and governmental obscounding of funds for political purposes. Bank and governmental officials are to blame for the loss of your funds in most cases due to what they try and proport as special findings of new laws. And back to those Australians- maybe you should tell your freinds that tried to help you do this in London to go back to their own Countries for work.,and leave other peoples funds alone.

    275. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by J.R.+Random · · Score: 1

      Somebody please scam George W. Bush. That would be one major fool with less economic power.

    276. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      You apparently don't know many rich people. Greed is blinding, and money calls more money to itself. The 419ers try to target people with access to money, such as business people. They don't target average joes who may be hungry, because there is nothing to take.

    277. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A variation of the first example above was actually attempted on me while I was trying to sell a car. The scammer agreed to buy the car, sent a fake check for more than the amount of the car and stated that the remainder was to be used to pay the shipping agent when they came to pick up the car. Suffice to say, there were enough things that did not add up and I turned the check over to the bank to thoroughly investigate. I didn't get taken, but I can see where some of these scams can fool even intelligent people.

    278. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mellon · · Score: 1

      Actually, what it's no different than is your grandmother getting her purse rifled through by the nice man she thought she could trust, and some drugs stashed there. And then getting arrested for it.

    279. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by mellon · · Score: 1

      When your mind isn't working well, there are scams that you can buy into. One of the classic 419 scams is to tell you that you're the heir of a guy from Australia (or South Africa, if you live in Australia) who made a fortune in mining, died with no relatives, and mentioned you in his will because of a kindness you did 40 years ago.

      It's not illegal for you to get the inheritance. It's just hard, because of issues involving international money transfers. You could be totally willing to, and even planning to, pay the taxes once the money arrives. But before it arrives, there are some banking fees you'll have to pay, which are only large because the amount being transfered is so much larger.

      Seriously, guys. Judge not, lest ye be judged.

    280. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The Nigerian government in the past was concerned about this I believe because many of the scammers also used forged stamps.

    281. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mitreya · · Score: 1
      I just don't get how people are stupid enough to fall for #1. A check is just a piece of paper until it's cashed

      I feel that it is responsibility of the bank to authenticate the check in less than 3 weeks (which, according to grandparent is what it takes). Or, notify you explicitly that the check will be fully cleared in 3 to 4 weeks.

    282. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      True, I've only known a few wealthy people, but I thought these Nigeria scams were shotgunned out to everyone, not targeted. I'm middle calss and I've gotten tons of them. I don't know anyone who hasn't gotten them.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    283. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by FailedTheTuringTest · · Score: 1

      Are you sure it's an *unintended* consequence?

    284. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      Have a heart!

      We did, and we started the Canadian Fund for Nigerian Scam Victims in Australia. We provide $10,000 in financial support to Australians who have fallen victims to these Nigerian scams.

      Unfortunately, we have recently changed signing officers and our bank requires us to change over our signing officers in person. Our bank is on the other side of the country, and the Fund has spent its travel allowance for the year.

      If there are any sympathetic Australians who would be so kind as to forward $3000, we will be able to travel to our bank and issue you a cheque for $10,000.

      Please be kind and sympathetic to these most unfortunate Australian victims of Nigerian scams. For all you know, the next victim might be you!

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    285. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither of those are really good analogies, but your point is still valid. However, they could probably still get you on conspiracy. I mean, what happens when you pay an undercover officer posing as a hitman to kill your wife? People go to jail for that all the time.

    286. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by djp928 · · Score: 1

      Solicitation is a crime. So yes, if you ask a police woman to have sex with you for money, you have committed a crime.

    287. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by TempeTerra · · Score: 1

      Good effort. I suggest you further your education in Australian by watching Hercules Returns

      --
      .evom ton seod gis eht
    288. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by TempeTerra · · Score: 1

      Does that mean they'll start making proper beer now?

      --
      .evom ton seod gis eht
    289. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      It was meant as a joke, but you are 100% correct if you interpret it as serious...

    290. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by zotz · · Score: 1

      "I think this is more to the point. People have an idea that certain information is sensitive, like SSNs, credit card numbers, and a few other things."

      Seriously though, even possession of this "sensitive" information should not be enough to enable such easy "identity theft." I mean, how many people have this information about most people now? Certainly more than 10 for most people right? Would you care to go up and order of magnitude or two?

      all the best,

      drew

      --
      FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
    291. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      It's a real child the human failure is trying to rape, not the FBI agent.

      All right, then which real child is he trying to rape? How did this make her feel? Will she need counseling? Will she have to testify against him?

      Those questions have no answers, because there isn't actually any real child involved. The victim is fictional. The would-be criminal thinks it's a real child, but it isn't.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    292. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      With true victimless "crimes" where there's not even a fictional victim.

      There is if you make one up -- just like there is in this case. For example, if you pretend that cocaine is poisonous to magic nose goblins, then snorting coke is attempted fictional murder.

      Of course, magic nose goblins aren't real. But neither is the money.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    293. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, by losing their money they also lose their freedom. It takes money to do "things".

    294. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of country farms have long winding driveways to their front door. My ex's family had a one kilometer driveway through their fields to the house, so neighbours would pick up the mail for them when they came visiting.

    295. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by spasm · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember puritan crazies held themselves a coup and took over large chunks of the UK for a few decades. And that a bunch of them decided it'd be a good idea to shift shop across the Atlantic once people got sick of them in the UK etc. So it's ultimately your fault that the US wound up with puritan idiots dabbling in government (I'm assuming (probably wrongly) you're writing from the UK or north western Europe..). : )

    296. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by MajroMax · · Score: 1

      Also, an IQ of 100 is not necessarily the true mean or median of the population, just a close approximation to both since, by the Central Limit Theorem, this kind of data will approximate a normal curve.

      Obligatory Pedant: The Central Limit Theorem only guarantees that the mean IQ of a large group would follow a normal curve. In theory, the IQ of individuals could be distributed arbitrarily -- everyone could have an IQ of 1 save for Superman, who has an IQ of (1+99*population_size).

      --
      "Evil company X is threatening to restrict our rights! Let's all get together to stop--OOOH! SHINEY!!!" -- AC
    297. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 1

      No, he's wrong. I know the definition of mean, so feel free to forgo any further mathematical definitions in your postings. For your own education, see here.

      Mean is an average. But average includes mean, median and mode. It is correct to use it in this way, and people like you are often misled by people who use the term properly but know that most people assume average and mean are synonymous. They aren't. Such distinctions are often taught in university level philosophy and critical thinking courses.

    298. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Miang · · Score: 1

      I don't know what's funnier, that you're citing Wiktionary as a source, or that you're suggesting "university level" philosophy courses to a statistician. ;-)

      If you're really that interested in pedantry, though, I might suggest Bartleby on the meaning of average as compared with median or mode. HTH, HAND, &c.

    299. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      Okay mods, it appears I need to explain the joke. The OP was referring to con artists that take cheap crappy speakers, then modify them so they look cosmetically like a far more expensive brand. I, with my witty one-word reply, compared this activity to the activities of audio manufacturer Bose, who make (some say) fairly bad sounding hi-fi equipment, but then try to promote it as high-end equipment in order to sell it for high prices. In summary, the moderation option you were looking for is not "redundant" but "funny". Thank you for your time.

    300. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Aerynvala · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points I would mod your comment up.

      --
      http://transformativeworks.org/
    301. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      A fool and his money are soon parted...

      How many more times am I going to hear the same thing over and over again?

      Is it somehow funny? I just don't get it. Could someone please explain, before I completely lose my mind?

      I'll explain it.

      For a small fee.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    302. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 1

      I don't care what you do for a living, as long as you don't work for us. :-)

      http://www.rucharacter.org/page/ea_glossary/
      http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=average
      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/average
      http://www.bartleby.com/61/53/A0545300.html
      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/average

      Even the ones that don't explicitly mention mean, median, and mode say that an average typically typifies a list of numbers. It can also be mean, of course, and that's the common definition, but I'm amazed that a statistician does not know this. What school did you go to?

    303. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 1

      I should also point out that your link also agrees with me. First, it says, "Average in this sense" and, when they give a definition of average, which I link to above, has "A number that typifies a set of numbers of which it is a function" as the first definition. Arithmetic mean is the second definition. So maybe you'd like to try another source that agrees with you? I'm yet to find one.

    304. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by CountryJustice · · Score: 1

      By definition, a large percentage of the population is stupid.

      I need a copy of your dictionary.

    305. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by fremean · · Score: 1

      Surely we can all agree that the oldest scam around is taxation, even the egyptions were in on that one...

    306. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Friday, I ain't got shit to do, I'll defend Firehed. He is correct; you, Mr. AC, are an idiot.

      If you have nothing to do then perhaps you should consider a course in logic. You might start by looking into the notion of "and." Ya see, it's like this: He started with "above average intelligence." So right away that's less than half. And since he didn't say how much above, it could be considerably less than half. But let's ignore than and assume only the slightest bit above half. But now he adds a second qualification - "a skeptical view of their fellow man." So that eliminates more people, and leaves us with significantly less than half.

      So considering that you actually had time to think about your reply before posting it, it seems that the more likely candidate for idiocy, or at least a pitiful grasp of logic, is you.

    307. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      Give it up there, SW. The mean is the average. The median is not. your own links say so.

    308. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 1

      I was going to ignore your post until I saw the sig:

      "Any time you have knowledge somebody else needs, that's a good thing for both of you." - G. Bowkett

      Oh, the irony.

    309. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      Having your own personal definition of words does not make the rest of the world's incorrect.

    310. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 1

      That's sorta my point. If you feel like seriously continuing this (stupid) argument, feel free to point out which of my links disagrees with what I said, since you haven't done that yet. For now, I've just thrown you in with the rest of the Slashdotters who lack any reading comprehension skills.

    311. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I personally don't eat prawns but I chuck on the barbie for my mum friends. They all seem to like it that way.

      We also dont call beer lager. Though we drink other beers apart from lager we generally just call all of it beer. Also I dont know what "bruising" is perhaps a pommy term.

      If your going to refer to beer try stubbies, grog, piss, long necks(for bogans 750ml bottles of beer).

      Also I hate to point this out but most Aussies when drinking beer don't just have one (unless its a long neck)

      We also don't have warm beer, it tastes like crap.

      Most men don't refer to their own wife or gf as a sheila (unless of course her name IS sheila). though some of us do call women sheila in general.

      We generally dont use the term buddy (at least not in a friendly way), it should be mate, champ, bro, cuz, bruz (depending on the person really and probably their background)

      "Are we chummy?" is probably better as "are we sweet?"

      The rest is tops :)

    312. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by ultranova · · Score: 1

      I think it's more that they don't quite understand the clearing process. Most people think that once a cheque has cleared the money's in their account for good and aren't aware that their bank can take it back later - with no time limit. The banks haven't gone out of their way to make that clear, either.

      This would seem to indicate that the foolishness was in keeping the money in the bank in the first place. Money doesn't just "disappear" from a good safe, or from a reasonably good hiding place.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    313. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Arafel65 · · Score: 1

      So conspiracy to commit a crime is no a crime eh?

    314. Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if I intend to stab someone and steal their wallet but accidentally cut off my own thumb and just get some blood on them. Am I a criminal? Just askin.

  2. I guess this has some merit... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I applaud his forward thinking in trying to get rid of stupid people, but I really don't think jail is an option. We're just gonna have to put up with them. Sorry man.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    1. Re:I guess this has some merit... by cthulu_mt · · Score: 0, Redundant

      We could always sterilize them and any dependent children they may have. It would be a good first step to cleaning up the pool.

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
    2. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      If all the stupid people are put in jail, then it's gonna be very lonely out here.

    3. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Scutter · · Score: 5, Funny

      If only there was a big island somewhere where we could send all these idiots.

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    4. Re:I guess this has some merit... by ancientt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually they provide a significant form of revenue. Whoever came up with the lottery was a genius!

      "Today we are announcing a state tax on stupi... er, a state lottery!"

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    5. Re:I guess this has some merit... by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Finally, someone else who thinks the lottery is a stupid tax.

      Well, I bet other think that but your one of the first I have saw say it. You know it is bad when the state starts refusing to allow casinos because the lottery is a significant portion of their budget and they are afraid of loosing that.

    6. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Fleeced · · Score: 1

      I applaud his forward thinking in trying to get rid of stupid people, but I really don't think jail is an option. We're just gonna have to put up with them. Sorry man.

      Forward thinking? Those stupid people are the backbone of the Nigerian community!

    7. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Fleeced · · Score: 5, Funny

      If all the stupid people are put in jail, then it's gonna be very lonely out here.

      What makes you think you'd be out here?

    8. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer to that question is obvious. Now, whether the grandparent is correct is another story, but one thing is for sure: You needed to ask that question, so you are going to jail.

    9. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As I think about it, this guy has a point. The scams involve approaching you under the guise of embezzling funds. Last time I checked, any of the activities they scammers want you to engage in are illegal. That being the case, it seems like a few crimes are involved -- embezzlement on both ends, and the theft of money by the Nigerian involved.

    10. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If only there was a big island somewhere where we could send all these idiots.

      hello i am allujabullshitname prince of nigeria. i am writing to you in the worst of health, i am afraid i may die soon, but do not worry, god is on my side. i recently have come acrsoss a islannd worth millions of american dollars an am looking for a governnment to deposit tyhe land masses.

      this millions of dollars of land is perfect to send all sorts of idiots, but i am afraid that i am to lose it soon, as there are those who conspire against me. but i am not afraid, for the lord will protect me.

      please send me your account so i can deposit..

      Oh, what the hell.. I actually don't know enough about international property law to know what kind of system you'd deposit land rights into anyway.

    11. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all Australians fail to comprehend the implications.

    12. Re:I guess this has some merit... by EvanED · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am somewhat sympathetic to your argument, but I don't buy it. It can be entirely reasonable to play the lottery, though not very regularly.

      Let's say that once a month you get a Powerball ticket with Powerplay, costing (according to Wikipedia) $2. You do this for 50 years. (In other words, you play the lottery starting when you are 20 until you're 70.)

      According to this compound interest calculator, if you aggressively invested that money instead and got 10% annual return for that timespan (probably entirely ridiculous), at the end of that you'd have $30,727. If we were to assume an already-optimistic 7% rate of return, that's only $10,500.

      If you were to play every other month (or not get powerplay) and get 10%, you're at $15,500, and at 7%, $5,200.

      In addition, you're not really going to be out all that money... on average, Wikipedia says the powerball has about a 50% rate of return. Which means that the $15,500 and $5,200 numbers are actually more realistic if you pay $2/mth.

      While it's not exactly a shabby sum, it's also not that much money if you've been wise with other investments. Giving up that amount of money is probably not really going to change your lifestyle. You might lose out on a couple vacations you could take when retired or something. (If we are even a little more conservative with how much we spend on the lottery... you play for 40 years instead of 50, spending $1/mth but getting back half, and could get 7% otherwise, you're looking at $1,200. That's barely enough for one "fancy" vacation.)

      Now, at the same time, in the very very remote chance you were to actually win a jackpot, your life would change. If you won even a million dollars -- let alone tens of millions -- you might be able to retire now (depending on how old you are), go buy a farm, do almost anything you want monitarily.

      It is not unreasonable to say "I'll take one less vacation when I'm 70 in exchange for an almost-zero-but-not-quite chance of a totally life-changing event."

      (The fact that a lot of lottery winnings result in people blowing through the winnings quickly, sometimes result in failed families or other bad effects, or that a lot of people don't play the lottery this way and actually put significant money into it is beside the point that playing the lottery isn't necessarily an irrational move.)

    13. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Funny

      You don't need to. Just say that's it's all very complicated but you will take care of all the details before you die.

    14. Re:I guess this has some merit... by S1mmo+61 · · Score: 5, Funny

      They already did, once America was full, they sent them all downunder

    15. Re:I guess this has some merit... by ozphx · · Score: 1

      That is an interesting way of justifying hope.

      Theres plenty of other ways of risking a small amount of money/effort for larger payoffs. You could invest that $1000 in a mineral exploration firm, and have a fairly small, but much much more tangible chance of getting enough to retire (like a couple of million bucks) out of it.

      Investing in the lottery is still a stupid tax on noobs. With a small amount of effort you can risk your money with much better odds.

      I mean seriously, how is the $400m MEGADRAW going to affect your life compared to $10m? You'd be stupid to be holding out for such a huge amount.

      --
      3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
    16. Re:I guess this has some merit... by daemonburrito · · Score: 1

      Eugenics. That didn't work out so well at the beginning of the 20th century. Not only were millions of capable, intelligent, and decent human beings maimed or killed for no good reason, but human stupidity remained entirely unaffected (self-evident).

      Not only is it screwed up (those proposing sterilization are never the subject of the policy), but it's pseudoscience.

      And why would you be against Lovecraft fans having children?

      Or maybe IHBT.

    17. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Your plan would make us even more vulnerable to diseases such as cancer, diabetes and many more, along with birth defects and an even lower average IQ. Homo sapiens already has a limited gene pool; you remember those articles about a population bottleneck from 70,000 years ago? Another would make it much worse. Genetic diversity is good for the species even if it does include undesirable characteristic, or at least it's better than a far more limited gene pool. Indeed, some would argue that perhaps that is why these problems are so common now.

      The genetic science aside, who decided you were so much better? Your plan would create terrible problems for our entire species through inbreeding, so it doesn't sound like you're so much smarter than the people you think shouldn't have the right to breed.

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    18. Re:I guess this has some merit... by srjh · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, America got the puritans, we got the criminals.

      Come to think of it, I think we got the better deal.

    19. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, maybe the the former USSR would be big enough...probably not.
      Oh wait, you mean the idiots that fall for the Nigerian scams...though for a moment you meant all idiots!

    20. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Fleeced · · Score: 1

      Uhm... I just re-read that. I meant economy - not community. Doh!

    21. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Beale · · Score: 1

      Reactionary much? You could remove over 9/10s of the human population and still have a wealth of genetic diversity, orders of magnitude more than required to maintain a stable breeding pool. There are an awful lot of humans.

    22. Re:I guess this has some merit... by z0idberg · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're not doing a very good job of selling your superior intelligence with that post........

    23. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      interestingly enough, if you are smart enough, you know how to deal with 'dumb' people.

      "jail dumb people" - this kind of thinking and searching for a scape-goat laid the basis for mass annihilation and work-camps in nazi germany.

      pat yourself on the back. you are the pinnacle of not thinking in circles.

      oh wait.

    24. Re:I guess this has some merit... by gnick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I mean seriously, how is the $400m MEGADRAW going to affect your life compared to $10m? You'd be stupid to be holding out for such a huge amount.

      That's my big deterrent. $1000 is worth 100 x $10 to me. $100k is worth 100 x $1000 to me. But I can't really say that $10M is worth 100 x $100k to me. And beyond that it drops off even faster. I'm not a big financial investor and have no need for $400M. It would be nice and I'd have fun with it, but it's not worth 400e6 x $1 in my limited scope of the world.

      I'd be much more likely to play the ~$200k type drawings, but I studied statistics all the way to post grad. And, I'm a little OCD. I can't spend a buck on something like that without running the numbers and making sure that I'm getting a positive rate of return - When the Powerball got high and my wife insisted on buying tickets, I put together spreadsheets comparing the various lotteries we have access to, factored in odds of winning at various levels, and valuated the various options for tickets. [We still bought Powerball tickets - I mentioned that I'd run numbers but decided that her excitement/hope/fun was worth the difference in rational spending and never showed them to her. I'm not convinced that the Powerball has ever broken even on rate of return - Not even close once you factor in taxes and the increased possibility of a shared pot due to a swell in play for a large pot.]

      For the record, I bought 1 scratcher when NM legalized the lottery - I won $1 and broke even. I consider myself a winner and won't play again.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    25. Re:I guess this has some merit... by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      The Arctic?

    26. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 4, Funny

      Fucking kangaroos.

      Hey, it's not as easy as it looks. What with all the hopping around and all.

    27. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I mean seriously, how is the $400m MEGADRAW going to affect your life compared to $10m? You'd be stupid to be holding out for such a huge amount.

      Well, not necessarily:

      Typically if you want the cash lump sum instead of an annuity, you'd get about 40% of the 'jackpot' amount. So the 10 million is already 4.

      Taxes will take about half. Now it's 2.

      2 million is a nice chunk of money, but it's probably not enough to quit your job on. I could spend most of that on a nice house in my neighborhood without even buying anything all that ridiculous.

      On the other hand, 400 million -> 80 million after taxes / instant payout, and now that is enough to quit your job and buy pretty much whatever you want.

    28. Re:I guess this has some merit... by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      That's what the pouch is for, it's like a built in handle.

      Sheesh, you gotta tell some people EVERYTHING

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    29. Re:I guess this has some merit... by syousef · · Score: 0

      Oh, what the hell.. I actually don't know enough about international property law to know what kind of system you'd deposit land rights into anyway.

      Let me help you out:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flush_toilet

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    30. Re:I guess this has some merit... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Could just as well sterilize everyone then, it doesn't look like the smart people are making any attempts at having kids because it would compromise their carreer.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    31. Re:I guess this has some merit... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Given the pace of climate change that'd be a short lived option. Not that that's a negative, of course.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    32. Re:I guess this has some merit... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Or maybe you could learn to play poker...

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    33. Re:I guess this has some merit... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Well, if your goal is to be remembered as an important person in history that approach would surely work. According to Godwin all internet discussion media are a monument to Hitler.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    34. Re:I guess this has some merit... by jabithew · · Score: 1

      Now, at the same time, in the very very remote chance you were to actually win a jackpot, your life would change. If you won even a million dollars -- let alone tens of millions -- you might be able to retire now (depending on how old you are), go buy a farm, do almost anything you want monitarily.

      It is standard industrial practice to correct for this with risk factors.

      Risk=probability*cost.

      In this case the cost would be negative, as you 'risk' gaining cash. The possible jackpots are in the order of millions (-cost) but the probability of winning them is also of the 1/millions magnitude (this is from UK experience, but I doubt lotteries are significantly different anywhere, I found a site which claims to have worked it out).

      As you can see, the order of magnitude guess of the adjustment for the jackpot-potential gives a few cents, maybe a few tenths of cents, which compared to the sums laid out is negligible. This gives you an idea of how much significance you should give the concept of winning the jackpot.

      i.e. Certain to lose c. $5000
      1*$5000=$5000
      Might win jackpot
      1/8*10^7 * -$1*10^6 =(approx) -$0.01

      Total losses weighted for jackpot=$5000.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    35. Re:I guess this has some merit... by jabithew · · Score: 1

      p.s. To do this some anywhere near accurately you'd need to include the risks of winning smaller prizes, and the fact that you need to sum across each play (which I forgot, but would still add up to only a couple of dollars, I suspect).

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    36. Re:I guess this has some merit... by jabithew · · Score: 1

      Further addendum:

      Risk factors are just expectation values repackaged for MBAs and governments.

      Here's the meaty version for scientists, engineers and mathmos. The relevant equation is the summation of the probability density(mass in the US?) function of the discrete random variable.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    37. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the difference, in your analysis, between playing the lottery regularly for decades versus just spending the same amount on a single draw? Y'know, apart from the time wasted buying several thousand tickets one at a time rather than all at once.

      Anyway, your key point (if I may put it in different words), is that the money-happiness relationship is non-linear. Your analysis makes sense if it's greater-than-linear. Personally, for me, it's less-than-linear. (If I was already a millionaire, an extra ten bucks would mean less to me than it does now.)

    38. Re:I guess this has some merit... by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      This reminds me of a really good biology teacher we had and his prediction.

      We where on the topic of biodiversity and he said that "I am 100% sure, that somewhere on this planet, there are people immune to AIDS". Concidering HIV and AIDS where new at the time (at least to us students), it seemed like such a bold/crazy statement, since AIDS was looked upon as a real killer/impossible to cure/prevent once infected with HIV.

      Many years later, I was reminded of him, after hearing they had found some prositutes in africa(don't remember where) who did not develop AIDS.

      ---

      I find it kind of poetic that important information and possibly a cure could come from some of the "lowest" people. People looked down upon by the rest of society, could be the ones to save parts of africa from this terrible disease.

      I can't tell the future, but I do know that biodiversity will help us find the cure for the next man-killer disease as well. It would be such a shame if we will have gotten rid of the ones who could save us.

      --
      She made the willows dance
    39. Re:I guess this has some merit... by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      If we put all the stupid people in jail, who would run the country?!?

    40. Re:I guess this has some merit... by cartman · · Score: 1

      i.e. Certain to lose c. $5000 1*$5000=$5000 Might win jackpot 1/8*10^7 * -$1*10^6 =(approx) -$0.01 Total losses weighted for jackpot=$5000.

      The situation is even worse than that.

      Generally, investors are compensated for assuming additional risk. That's why the average returns are higher for stocks than bonds--because stocks pay a risk premium.

      With lotteries, on the other hand, the investor pays money to assume risk, rather than being paid for it. (It defies logic that people will pay money to assume risk when they would be paid for assuming risk in an alternative investment).

      If people wanted to take incredible risks, then they could do so in the stock market by using derivatives and leverage. They could easily set up investments where the chances of failure are very high and the payouts are also very high. But the stock market investment would have a risk-adjusted payout that's positive, whereas the lottery has a risk-adjusted payout that's a 90% loss.

    41. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, before that it was England, Ireland and Scotland :D

    42. Re:I guess this has some merit... by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      funny, I thought it was England doing the sending...

    43. Re:I guess this has some merit... by mcvos · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Finally, someone else who thinks the lottery is a stupid tax.

      Well, I bet other think that but your one of the first I have saw say it.

      Then you haven't been paying attention. Ages ago I also called lotteries a stupidity tax, and I doubt I made that up myself.

      It's wrong, though. Lotteries aren't any more a tax on stupidity than paying for bungeejumping is. It's not about the money, it's about the thrill, the idea that you could win. Not everything in life is about monetary return on investment.

      I never play in a lottery, but I know people who do, fully aware that they'll never win back what they spend on it. But that's not why they play.

      Calling lotteries a stupid tax is very profound when you're in highschool and just figured out how probabilities work. But as you grow up, you should realise that people are getting more from it than just money. They pay for a dream, and it's a pretty nice dream, even if it's not true.

    44. Re:I guess this has some merit... by jabithew · · Score: 1

      Insightful.

      It makes sense because investing in stocks is putting capital to good use (i.e. allowing your money to be used to achieve something) while putting it in to a lottery is not, really, so you can't expect good returns.

      Also, in the UK people sometimes use "it supports charity" as a reason to play the lottery, which makes no sense at all. Charities would be better off if you just gave them the money directly.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    45. Re:I guess this has some merit... by DrHyde · · Score: 2, Informative

      America got the criminals too. Mostly in the Virginia and Georgia colonies. You obviously didn't get enough of them.

    46. Re:I guess this has some merit... by j_sp_r · · Score: 1

      Casino's are a way to tax illegal earnings (once you flush a few millions trough them you end up with the law of big numbers and you get more then 90% back).

      Off course, my government has a tax on casino's to stop gambling addiction. Doesn't explain all the commercials (Holland Casino). It was the most boring place I've ever been.

    47. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did. The puritans make criminals out of the rest of us at a most ungodly rate.

    48. Re:I guess this has some merit... by FriendlyPrimate · · Score: 1

      While I somewhat agree with your argument (for $15k, you get a lifetime of hope), what you're forgetting about is that the lottery makes some people less concerned about their day-to-day finances. They somewhat justify large credit card debt by thinking that they can always get out of it "as soon as I win the lottery", and therefore do not put enough effort into paying off debt.

    49. Re:I guess this has some merit... by basicio · · Score: 1

      Australia?

    50. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only there was a big island somewhere where we could send all these idiots.

      There IS a big island to which to send them: Australia.

    51. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      if you aggressively invested that money instead and got 10% annual return for that timespan (probably entirely ridiculous), at the end of that you'd have $30,727. If we were to assume an already-optimistic 7% rate of return, that's only $10,500.

      But how much is that money worth in today's dollars? An investment doesn't technically make money unless it beats inflation.

      Also, I have an argument for purchasing one, and only one lottery ticket each game. Say the odds are 1/1,000,000 if you buy one ticket, and 2/1,000,000 if you buy two. If you don't buy a ticket your odds of winning are zero. 1/1,000,000 is infinitely larger than zero, but 2/1,000,000 is only twice as large as 1/1,000,000. Therefore, it's only a bad idea to pay the lottery if the odds were 1/infinity, because those are the same odds of not playing at all. The improvement in your odds by buying two lottery tickets, instead of one, is negligible.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    52. Re:I guess this has some merit... by theelectron · · Score: 1

      As an American, I have to agree with you: you got the better deal.

    53. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Dirtside · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that there's more value than just possible cash winnings in buying a lottery ticket: some people find entertainment value in the very act of the gamble. To many people, even if your expected ROI is less than 100%, the difference is made up for by the excitement of the gambling. Now, I don't personally find any entertainment value in that, if there's no element of skill; pure-chance gambling holds virtually no interest to me (very occasionally I do participate, though; when my office puts together a lottery pool, I *do* participate, for exactly one reason: if they DID hit it big, and I was the only one not chipping in, I'd feel like an idiot for the rest of my life, and $1 is quite worth it to eliminate that risk).

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    54. Re:I guess this has some merit... by toby · · Score: 1

      "The Arctic" as an ice sheet only exists for a few months a year, even without taking into account global warming. I guess the grandparent meant Antarctica. Not quite as balmy as Nigeria, for sure.

      --
      you had me at #!
    55. Re:I guess this has some merit... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Then you haven't been paying attention. Ages ago I also called lotteries a stupidity tax, and I doubt I made that up myself.

      Well, I have been paying attention, our paths just havn't crosses before now when you have said it.

      t's wrong, though. Lotteries aren't any more a tax on stupidity than paying for bungeejumping is. It's not about the money, it's about the thrill, the idea that you could win. Not everything in life is about monetary return on investment.

      Return on investment has nothing to do with why it is a stupid tax. It is becuase the lotteries get promoted as "helping the schools" or providing needed services in some other area.

      In many state, As I have been told was the same in others, they outlaw all other forms of gambling just so the lottery is the only viable option. In my state, when they first took on the lottery, back in the mid 80's, they claimed that half of the money would goto the schools. Everybody loved this idea and ran out and played. Then the state removed existing funding from the schools budget so when half of the lottery money showed up, it ended up being only 10 cents on the dollar and that was absorbed by administration costs of getting the money to the schools meaning that the school actually got a decrease in funding. It took something like 5 more years before enough people were playing the lottery that the schools actually saw an increase in revenue and that was only 5 cents to a dollar played which came out to a little over $200 in new money per school district. And when you asked these uninformed lottery people why they play, a good 60% or better cited "helping the schools out" as a number one reason. If the state needed money, they should have taxed people, not create some fallacy that someone is helping under the guise of hope in order to convince the poorest people to give them more money. That my friend is a stupid tax.

      Calling lotteries a stupid tax is very profound when you're in highschool and just figured out how probabilities work. But as you grow up, you should realise that people are getting more from it than just money. They pay for a dream, and it's a pretty nice dream, even if it's not true.

      I'm far from in or just out of high school. But perhaps your statement here shows that your not the type of person I thought you were and were actually mocking the idea. Some people do it for a deam of getting out of the hell they have to live in. I'm actually shocked when I think about some who consider this as a viable option to the nations poor, instead of educating them or giving opportunities for them to improve their life, we have a lottery that they will disproportionately buy into. It's actually worse then the revival that places subwoofers around to give you that "electric feeling" just before passing the collection plate. It is worse they those churches that lock the doors and keep passing the collection plates around until they get a certain amount of money. You see, those two groups of fraudsters have to rely on people needing hope. The government just fails to provide proper services and creates the need for it. And they do this not because there isn't enough money in the budget or there isn't any other way, but to increase revenues so they can offset school funding and spend it somewhere else. 70% of the people in my state who play the lottery wouldn't be paying taxes in the first place. But all the sudden, they have 10 games or more that they are willing to pay 50% to the government on.

    56. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Common mistake. It's entirely possible to invest by "gambling". What you described is not.

      You might win, yes. If you win it will be a large life change, yes. But will you win? Probably not. You just gave up vacations et. al. for absolutely nothing.

      What you need to analyze, instead of cost vs possible winnings, is expected return.

      Multiply your odds of winning each individual prize value with a single entry by that prize value. Add those numbers together. That is what you expect to win. Now compare that number to the cost of the entry.

      If the cost of entry is above the expected return - you lose. You're gambling, you're paying the "stupid tax", however you want to look at it. If the cost of entry is below the expected return (which it won't be) then the lottery agency is utterly stupid, they are losing money, and you have every right to take advantage of the favorable odds.

      Just a little lesson in how to "invest" in "gambling" - good luck ever using it, no lottery offers profitable returns.

    57. Re:I guess this has some merit... by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Another way of looking at my point is that money value isn't linear, and the value of even that tiny chance of a few million to couple hundred million is more than the value of a couple thousand.

      For instance, say that you have a 1-in-20-million chance of winning $10m if you buy a $1 ticket. You don't want to just say that the expected return is (1/20,000,000)*$10,000,000 - $1 = -$0.50, so your expected monetary return is negative. You might say that having the $1 you were to put into the adventure is worth 1 "happy point", but that getting that $10,000,000 would actually give you 30 million happy points. At that point, you have a 1/20,000,000 chance of getting 30,000,000 happy points by spending 1 happy point. This means your expected return is 1/20,000,000*30,000,000 - 1, or 0.5 happy points. This means that in expectation you will wind up with more happy points if you buy the lottery ticket.

      People who follow the logic I presented before aren't actually calculating that all out or anything, but they either believe both, neither, or are inconsistent. ;-)

      (A lot of research has shown that money has decreasing value as you get more, and this seems to fly in the face of this too. But I don't think it's as strict as that implies; I think there are humps where having $x allows you to do something you wouldn't be able to with less. For instance, I'd love to be given, say, $30,000, but if I got that it would go in a bank (/roth IRA). OTOH, if I were given, say, $100,000, I'd probably go buy a house, and I'd be happier with that than "just" having $30,000 in an account somewhere. More to the point, I think I would be happier with a house than "just" having $100,000 in an account. This means that I get more happiness points per dollar with $100,000 than I would with $30,000. It's these sorts of humps that make it so that I would probably rather have a 1/20,000,00th chance of $20,000,000 than $1.)

    58. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Butisol · · Score: 1

      That miniscule chance of winning obviously isn't a great bet in purely mathematical terms, but I guess the emotional boost would be well worth it for many people. It's something to look forward to once a month. It's a pleasant topic of conversation with one's fellow wage slaves. It's that little bit of hope that makes it easier to get to Friday.

    59. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't that the basis of the movie "Escape from New York?"

    60. Re:I guess this has some merit... by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Actually, the return to the public at a casino is very much higher than from a lottery. Slot machines are like video games you can actually sometimes win from.

      I can take $20 to a casino, play the penny slots and nickel video poker and be entertained for between an hour and eight hours. I might even have some or all of the $20 left. Sometimes I leave with a bit more, and have left a few times with several hundred dollars. I'm sure overall the casino keeps more than I do, but I budgeted that money to go to them for entertainment so anything I keep is a bonus.

      If you bet with part of your entertainment budget and don't go crazy, it's not more expensive than eating at a fancy restaurant or staying in a fancy hotel. A roof, four walls, a clean bed and bathroom, and a wake up call do not cost from $200 to $2,000 a night. Still, many people would rather stay in a fancy hotel than a Super 8 or La Quinta (which are two pretty affordable hotels which tend to have clean rooms).

      The return at many casinos on the slot machines is between 90% and 98%. The table games tend to return in the same range. They make it up in volume, food, and drinks.

      The lotteries, on the other hand, only entertain you for a few seconds and have a return at around 50%.

    61. Re:I guess this has some merit... by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

      Um, not quite right.

      America got the puritans, other wacko Christians, criminals, deadbeats, and anyone they just didn't want. You guys down under are the lucky ones, you just got the criminals. We got the wretched refuse.

      Hell we even got the Nazi rejects.

    62. Re:I guess this has some merit... by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

      Umm, better clarify that. I'm not talking Jewish here. I meant Albert Einstein. ;)

    63. Re:I guess this has some merit... by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Those people are the ones who earned it the nickname "a tax on the stupid".

    64. Re:I guess this has some merit... by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that the millions you're winning out of the pot is going to be settled at a much lower value (probably around 10-20%) which will be paid out over 20 years or longer.

      If you won the approximate value of 10M in 2007 money back in 1987 (which from what I remember was one of the biggest pots) and got settled for a 10% payout over 20 years, you would be getting an extra $25,000 this year which is not really all that much anymore while back in 1987 that would've been a decent year income. And then we have the current state of our economy, the return might be even lower if you won 10M these days. Not to talk about the lifestyle you'll get used to the first years of your payout, you won't be able to afford that lifestyle anymore over those 20 years because the money devaluates so fast (and there is no decent investment (unless you gamble on the stock markets) I know off that matches up to the devaluation of money).

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    65. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The WORLD is the idiot jail. If you can prove your lucidity, come join me Outside the Asylum.
      -Wonko the Sane

    66. Re:I guess this has some merit... by alienw · · Score: 1

      It's funny how people talk about expected value on lottery tickets. Statistically, expected value makes sense only as an average. For example, if you often park illegally and only sometimes get a ticket, you could compute the expected value of a parking ticket when parking illegally. Then, that number would be useful to figure out how much you would spend ON AVERAGE.

      It doesn't make sense to talk about the expected value of one transaction -- you either win a lot of money or you don't win anything. Expected value only makes sense if you buy enough lottery tickets to win regularly, and for those winnings to average out. Given the odds of powerball, even if you buy 100,000 tickets, you are still 99.99999% certain to lose. Even if the expected value of a $1 ticket was $500, it would not make sense to play at those odds unless you could buy a large enough number of tickets to make the probability of winning close to 100%. Otherwise, you'll just lose all your money.

    67. Re:I guess this has some merit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, what the hell.. I actually don't know enough about international property law to know what kind of system you'd deposit land rights into anyway.

      Hint: neither does the victim.

    68. Re:I guess this has some merit... by shmelly · · Score: 1

      If all the stupid people are put in jail, then it's gonna be very lonely out here.

      What makes you think you'd be out here?

      What makes you think either of you would be out there?

      Oh, wait...

    69. Re:I guess this has some merit... by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      The warden, I would assume.

    70. Re:I guess this has some merit... by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      It's not about the money, it's about the thrill, the idea that you could win. Not everything in life is about monetary return on investment.

      And for some people it's about addiction. I used to work with a woman who played the lottery every day. She would spend so much on lottery tickets that she'd have to borrow money to pay her rent.

      People like that, whether it's self delusion or simply honest stupidity, really don't understand that spending $100 and getting $20 back doesn't make you a winner.

    71. Re:I guess this has some merit... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      And for some people it's about addiction. I used to work with a woman who played the lottery every day. She would spend so much on lottery tickets that she'd have to borrow money to pay her rent.

      People like that, whether it's self delusion or simply honest stupidity, really don't understand that spending $100 and getting $20 back doesn't make you a winner.

      People like that have a serious problem. It's an addiction, similar to a hard drug addiction. The people I know who play the lottery have a good job and buy one ticket a month. Or maybe a few.

  3. Well said... by NFN_NLN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "It's hard to con an honest man."

    1. Re:Well said... by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No its not, they are the easiest to scam - you just have to make the scam appeal to a different aspect. i.e. solicit donations to non-existent charities, say one of their relatives owes money etc.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    2. Re:Well said... by NFN_NLN · · Score: 1

      No its not, they are the easiest to scam - you just have to make the scam appeal to a different aspect. i.e. solicit donations to non-existent charities.

      WRONG. The scammer wants to make money from the deal. How are they going to coax the mark into giving them money when they claim to already have lots. Let me guess some regulation is stopping them so they want you to help them break the law by helping them unlock funds... If the mark helps he's no longer an honest man.

      The timing couldn't have been better. Fark just had an article on this:


      "He was going to give me $10,000, and I would take the rest of the $80,000 and place it in a charity to help the poor," Malone said.
      Click here to find out more!

      The man then asked Malone to prove he could be trusted by showing he had his own money, so Malone said they went to a nearby bank.

      "All I could think about was, 'This money's going to help a lot of people,'" Malone said.

      WRONG. You wanted to $10k you greedy bastard.

      http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/jail-greedy-scam-victims-diplomat/2008/08/21/1219262419867.html

    3. Re:Well said... by Kohath · · Score: 1

      It is a valid point. The people who fall for these scams are guilty. They are trying to get away with something and make some quick cash in a shady deal.

      On the other hand, society probably doesn't need to be protected from these scam victims. So putting them in jail would be expensive and serve no purpose.

    4. Re:Well said... by Fleeced · · Score: 5, Funny

      "It's hard to con an honest man."

      In the words of Terry Pratchett:

      There is a saying - "You can't fool an honest man" - which is much quoted by people who make a profitable living by fooling honest men.

    5. Re:Well said... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Well, no. It isn't always a shady deal. Or at least there is nothing unethical or illegal about it. Most of the scams are perpetrated under the guise that you will be helping someone avoid having their money stolen. It usually comes with some story about how the government or some other force is doing something that would be unethical or even illegal in your country so your actually under the impression that your helping someone out. Sure, there is the reward side of it. But that alone doesn't make something greedy or shady, they put rewards out for information to who was responsable for a crime all the time. Often it is just an attention getter and not someone who said "I know but won't say anything because isn't anything for me in it". Often it is just someone who wasn't thinking about it and saw the reward and thought do I know anything.

      So no, not all victims of a scam are greedy nor are they doing something shady. Some actually think, however incorrect they might be, think that they are doing the right thing. That is what appeals to so many people.

    6. Re:Well said... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you missed a bit of the point by fixating on just one kind of scam.

      Scammers can go around saying they don't have any money at all.

      All a scammer has to con an honest person is say that they need money for their family, even if no family is there. They can even have pictures of some family that really isn't theirs, or are really estranged. In some areas, fake panhandlers live better than the people that they con, even though no one gains anything buy giving them money.

    7. Re:Well said... by Strilanc · · Score: 1

      That's actually not true, although many cons will no longer work. Lots of people with cancer spend thousands of dollars on cures that don't work [the seller doesn't always know this].

    8. Re:Well said... by Jeff+Vader · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is nothing well said about this kind of logic. Women have been told not to jog alone at night many times - are they then responsible for being raped if that occurs? Better yet, should we jail these women? Slippery slope when you blame a victim.

    9. Re:Well said... by tukang · · Score: 1

      "It's hard to con an honest man."

      "It takes one to know one"

    10. Re:Well said... by Tom90deg · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think the actual quote is "You can cheat a honest man, but not make a fool out of him."

    11. Re:Well said... by broohaha · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'd say it isn't. I was scammed into helping what I thought was a stranded student who'd got his wallet stolen and needed some cash to go home to a far suburb. It was early in my life working downtown, and I believed the guy. I was totally fooled.

      How did I know this? Three weeks later, i saw the same kid walking around doing the exact same thing soliciting help for cash, only a few blocks away from where I gave him ten bucks. Motherfucker, I thought.

    12. Re:Well said... by Velox_SwiftFox · · Score: 1

      I wish I'd saved the email I got from the minor Nigerian banking official, pleading for my help claiming a $25 million account's funds, lest "by law, they will be transferred to the United Nations Fund to Promote War in Africa and in General".

    13. Re:Well said... by Deadstick · · Score: 1
      "It's hard to con an honest man."

      It is no such thing. Phishers, among others, do it all the time. You can't hustle an honest man, because hustling is stealing from somebody by making him think he's the one doing the stealing.

      rj

    14. Re:Well said... by Garabito · · Score: 1

      No its not, they are the easiest to scam - you just have to make the scam appeal to a different aspect. i.e. solicit donations to non-existent charities, say one of their relatives owes money etc.

      Being honest is not exactly the same as being gullible.

    15. Re:Well said... by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      But they're not mutually exclusive either. As such, the fact that he is a gullible honest man has no bearing on that statement proving that an honest man can be conned too.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    16. Re:Well said... by skelly33 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "In some areas, fake panhandlers live better than the people that they con"

      True that! I had a friend in San Francisco offer a homeless man $15/hr to come in and paint his apartment - he declined saying he could make more on the street corner. That attitude is exactly why I never dole out cash to pan handlers, though perhaps will offer a morsel of food on occasion.

    17. Re:Well said... by wellingj · · Score: 1

      Your assumption is that an honest man wants to help every one he can. In the literal sense an honest man wouldn't tell a lie, how does that have anything to do with charity?

      Some of the most honest men I've known would't raise a finger to help someone they didn't know.

    18. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I live in SF and two weekends ago I was riding a bus whether this loud tranny was explaining to their friend how to work a person. S/he said that asking for food is a good tool in the arsenal (paraphrased), relating a story of how one time s/he asked a guy for something from a restaurant and the guy got her some sandwiches and said "don't spend it all in one place". S/he opened the bag and there was a twenty in with the sandwiches.

      It made me a little more jaded about people who ask for food, but I'll probably still keep giving food (and never any money... I've been burned too many times doing that.)

    19. Re:Well said... by LaskoVortex · · Score: 1

      S/he said that asking for food is a good tool in the arsenal (paraphrased)

      You mean I gave that bitch a half-eaten sandwich for nothing?

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    20. Re:Well said... by PiNtoS · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, I actually was a stranded student once - in downtown Chicago, trying to get back to school, I had to panhandle for a couple bucks for the Metra. I felt like an idiot, but moreso I worried that all the con artists out there made it much less likely that anyone would want to help me out.

    21. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Sir Terry (Well, he SHOULD be Sir Terry by now!) also point out that there's no such thing as an honest, law abiding citizen? That even if you crawled into your attack and sat in the dark all day, you'd still be guilty of loitering, at the least?

    22. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If he'd told you the truth, you would never have given him any money, so he made creative use of the fact that you are more willing to give money to a stranded college student than to a person that really needs it. So after all, perhaps you are the motherfucker.

      Many people seem to assume that other people become dishonest for the fun of it or because they are evil when in fact they are just totally despaired. Of course, there are also people who manage to remain honest, but this is definitely not encouraged in our hypocritical society. By the same token, beggars have to try to look ugly, unwashed, and dress in old, dirty clothes. If they look healthy, wash themselves and take care of their clothes, almost nobody will give them money. That's how it works.

    23. Re:Well said... by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      There is a saying - "You can't fool an honest man" - which is much quoted by people who make a profitable living by fooling honest men.

      Indeed you can. At the very least you can sell people something under false pretences. Still, it seems that the rewards are higher and the risks lower if you play on peoples' greed. If you fleece a partner in crime, they can't go to the police, and while there's a risk they may have you murdered, that's not very likely.

    24. Re:Well said... by jnnnnn · · Score: 1

      He then goes on to say that it is much more sporting to fool dishonest ones -- and you hardly have to aim.

    25. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say it isn't. I was scammed into helping what I thought was a stranded student who'd got his wallet stolen and needed some cash to go home to a far suburb. It was early in my life working downtown, and I believed the guy. I was totally fooled.

      How did I know this? Three weeks later, i saw the same kid walking around doing the exact same thing soliciting help for cash, only a few blocks away from where I gave him ten bucks. Motherfucker, I thought.

      Dude, I'm sorry I got stranded a second time it was just a coincidence you saw me in the same area. I'd be happy to send you the $10 back but I'm living abroad so you'd have to send your bank account information to my Nigerian address. Really sorry for the misunderstanding.

    26. Re:Well said... by djdavetrouble · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I live in SF

      True story, wife saw a daily panhandler one day getting out of his Lexus with Jersey plates. He then
      went into his trunk, took some dirt out of a bag and rubbed it on his clothes and face....
      getting ready for the day.....

      --
      music lover since 1969
    27. Re:Well said... by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

      "Dwarven Vow #2: Never abandon someone in need."
      "Dwarven Vow #18: It is better to be deceived than to deceive."

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
    28. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you chased him down and bashed his head in?

    29. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here, gave some guy $14 once ($20-30 in today's dollar). Which isn't much money, but I was a poor student at the time and it was all I was carrying. Same MO, stranded in a bad neighborhood (mine) in the middle of the night and needed to get home.

      I had been stranded in similar situations so it was believable to me. Con Artists will often hit just the right buttons to con a particular person. I do have some sympathy for Nigerian Scam victims. You have to understand that 99.9% of the blatantly obvious Nigerian Scam e-mails are copycats. There are real con artists writing a few of them and with the internet they can target a specific psychological profile. When a Con Artist has your number, then deciding not to trust them feels like a betrayal of your principles. And it's only $14 after all.. Then it just becomes a game of ratcheting up and getting the mark to send good money after bad.

      PS I counsel friends and family not to send good money after bad in non-scam settings all the time, it's not very effective. People seem to be hardwired to have a stronger aversion to losing than the appeal of winning.

    30. Re:Well said... by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

      Happened to me, but luckily I didn't give him money the first time around.

      The second time he asked me (one week later, same spot) I told him "you seem to get lost a lot".

      He just went away to try and scam someone else.

    31. Re:Well said... by jrumney · · Score: 1

      but I'll probably still keep giving food (and never any money... I've been burned too many times doing that.)

      They light it as you hand it over?

    32. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the kid was just really unlucky and lost his wallet again?

      And again and again and again and....

    33. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are two kinds of scams -- those that take advantage of the victim's greed, and those that take advantage of his humanity.

      I have limited sympathy for victims of the former; but I find the latter despicable, as they not only harm a good person, but they lower trust in humanity in general.

      Many stranded students have had trouble finding their way home because of scams like this.

    34. Re:Well said... by toby · · Score: 1

      ...and the problem with your attitude is that many panhandlers (I'll go out on a limb and say most) are truly needy!

      Your rationalisation for not giving (and boy I've heard it more than enough) is punishing those who really need your $1 for the laziness(?) of a tiny minority. Not only that - to get back on topic of this article - you're punishing them for the same kind of thinking that infects most of our society: "Wow it would be nice to get money without having to work for it."

      Even if you personally don't think that way, you can bet it's a sentiment shared by many people who make your rationalisation. I've certainly heard it made hypocritically.

      --
      you had me at #!
    35. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      did you at least confront him? Kick the crap out of him? I'm guessing not, you pussy.

    36. Re:Well said... by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      I hope you called the police and had them come pick up what is obviously a vagrant asking for handouts.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    37. Re:Well said... by jpatters · · Score: 2, Funny

      The most creative panhandler I have ever seen had a sign that went like this:

      "Ninjas killed my family. Please give me money to go to karate school."

      He gut busted by the police because it turned out that his family had not, actually, been killed by ninjas.

      --
      "Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
    38. Re:Well said... by citylivin · · Score: 1

      sadly vagrancy is not against the law in most places. Not sure about american laws though.

      the worst ones are the ones that dart out into traffic to try and get handouts. You hit them, hopefully its a killing blow otherwise they will sue your ass off and probably win.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    39. Re:Well said... by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      Typically in US cities begging for handouts is some kind of offense, and if nothing else an officer could have someone clear off for trespassing on state property if they are in the road or on the side of the highway. Unfortunately very little seems to be done about it in most places I've lived.

      My commute home takes me off a highway interchange that is "prime" begging turf and there's usually a man there unless it's freezing cold or raining. I've never seen someone jump into moving traffic though, that's ballsy.

      Seeing as beggars here seem to be mostly successful via playing up sympathy I don't imagine it would work out too well.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    40. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not giving money to everyone who asks for it is "punishing" them???

    41. Re:Well said... by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 1

      I have trouble believing the veracity of your claim.

      --
      Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
    42. Re:Well said... by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 1

      There is a book called "inevitible illusions" which explores this very subject. You can check it out at your local library.

      I really like reading rainbow as a child.

      --
      Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
    43. Re:Well said... by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      I have a policy of always giving money to beggars who say they need it for booze.

    44. Re:Well said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This happens regularly in Australian cities, these people are called Aboriginals.

    45. Re:Well said... by skelly33 · · Score: 1

      "many panhandlers [...] are truly needy! Your rationalisation [...] is punishing those who really need your $1 for the laziness(?) of a tiny minority."

      Perhaps in your experience - in mine, they are predominantly hustlers. It is not my job to care for the needy - there are social programs for that. If you really want to support the truly needy, support the social programs.

      I don't believe my attitude is a problem just because I choose not to take responsibility for the problems of others. You could give away every last red cent you own and still not make a dent - and then you would join them.

    46. Re:Well said... by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      I have trouble believing the veracity of your claim.

      Well she noticed him because over the course of time, she had
      engaged him in conversation, asked about his problems, tried to
      "help him out" as I am sure many did.

      So, one day when she saw him a a nearby street putting on his
      "make-up", of course she noticed.

      I don't care if you have trouble believing the veracity of my claim,
      this is not a friend of a friend story. This is a true fact.

      --
      music lover since 1969
  4. Teh obvious linkage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.419eater.com

    1. Re:Teh obvious linkage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  5. why not...? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    why not block all automatic financial/bank transactions with Nigeria? Make it so some body has to sign for it, etc.

    heck....if both parties are "guilty", why not put road-blocks to block both?

    1. Re:why not...? by NFN_NLN · · Score: 2, Insightful

      why not block all automatic financial/bank transactions with Nigeria? Make it so some body has to sign for it, etc.

      heck....if both parties are "guilty", why not put road-blocks to block both?

      Why not RTFM?

      "Professor Olu Agbi said there were almost 140 million people in Nigeria and fewer than 0.1 per cent were involved."

      That's a great idea! Let's make it harder for the 99.9% of law abiding people because of a couple of jack-asses. Furthermore let's make sure we invest a lot of government money to put this new sign-off system in place... at least $36M+/year to make it extra ironic.

    2. Re:why not...? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      why not learn sarcasm?

      anyways...."RTFM" doesn't apply....as it's an article, not a manual!

      ANYWHO....
      if u do block the entire country....the rest of the 99.9% will hunt down those responsible and beat them to a pulp...and the problem will be solved....and the block can be then removed

      come on...u have to think about lynching mob mentality!

    3. Re:why not...? by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is poor math.

      What percentage of those 140,000 scammers participate in international transactions? Just about 100%.

      What percentage of the 140 million normal people participate in international transactions? Not quite 0%, but very close to it.

      It's quite possible that the vast majority of Nigerians making international transactions are scammers. Maybe it's not, I don't have the numbers. But you can't just say that because 99.9% of people are law abiding, this measure shouldn't be taken.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    4. Re:why not...? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      interesting point....and I was only saying it sarcastically

    5. Re:why not...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on! You never been in Nigeria, haven't you? Lagos (Nigeria's big city) is a place where, if you dare to show your American Passport, you going to get kidnapped and they will ask the American Embassy for a 50 grand ransom on order to set you free.
      They are a damned criminal country, the whole thing.

    6. Re:why not...? by dotgain · · Score: 1
      That's got to be the most amazingly desperate attempt at a Straw-man I've seen since it's been trendy to catch people out a building Straw-men.

      I think we all who's buried in meth

    7. Re:why not...? by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Actually, what I said was that it may be worth requiring bank-to-bank transfers to Nigeria to have a physical signature, or at least a direct telephone conversation, rather than allowing them to occur completely automatically. But hey, don't let the truth stand in the way of being an asshole, you can do it!

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    8. Re:why not...? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      no...I went sober...

    9. Re:why not...? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      no..I agree with ya 100%

      Or at least check ID!

    10. Re:why not...? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      that's why I'm still alive and I'd like to keep it that way ;)

  6. Gullible tax by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much money financial institutions and law enforcement agencies spend following up on people burned by unbelievable scams. All sympathy to people who were swindled by seemingly legitimate superfund schemes, but a fool and his money is soon parted.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    1. Re:Gullible tax by itsthebin · · Score: 1

      This Story came about after the Queensland police contacted all the people who had made international transactions via Australian banks to Nigeria.

      Not much effort really

      Though you would think the banks should point their customers to websites detailing scams of Nigerian origin and check to see if they really wanted to transfer money.

      --
      ...I obey the laws of physics....
  7. I Will Be Rich in a Few Weeks by NerdENerd · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    A Nigerian diplomat emailed me a few days ago with the opurtunity of a life time. I wont go into the details but all I had to do was send him my personal information and he is going to transfer a few million dollars into my bank account. I can wait to spend all that free money this complete stranger is going to transfer into the account that I gave him access to.

    1. Re:I Will Be Rich in a Few Weeks by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Swing and a miss. Gotta try harder for a Funny mod.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    2. Re:I Will Be Rich in a Few Weeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's hilarious!

    3. Re:I Will Be Rich in a Few Weeks by Daimanta · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's ok. With the millions that he will make, he could easily afford some top notch golfing lessons.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    4. Re:I Will Be Rich in a Few Weeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny? I thought that NerdENerd was going for an Informative mod.

  8. Guilt depends on the scam by thogard · · Score: 1

    If you agree to help someone launder stolen money, that is a crime in most countries even if the money doesn't exist.

    One of the more successful scams now involves stealing email accounts of travellers and sending all their friends a note describing some sort of robbery and asking for money.

    1. Re:Guilt depends on the scam by harryjohnston · · Score: 1

      If you agree to help someone launder stolen money, that is a crime in most countries even if the money doesn't exist.

      Not unreasonably, but as with blackmail it may be that it is more sensible not to prosecute so that the victims are not afraid to come forwards and report the crime.

    2. Re:Guilt depends on the scam by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      In the US, you make it a crime then agree not to prosecute so you have some leverage to get them to talk. If you don't have any leverage, the embarrassed mark has little incentive to talk. They're probably never going to see the money again, and there's nothing stopping them from keeping quiet. If you tell them they'll be prosecuted for the fraud they were trying to commit unless they help in the prosecution of the original scammer, they have incentive.

    3. Re:Guilt depends on the scam by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      If you agree to help someone launder stolen money, that is a crime in most countries even if the money doesn't exist.

      Not unreasonably, but as with blackmail it may be that it is more sensible not to prosecute so that the victims are not afraid to come forwards and report the crime.

      Wait... so you're saying I can commit crimes and then all I have to do is get blackmailed for it and I'm off the hook? Sweet!

  9. Just to be clear... by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since the summary doesn't make this clear and I'm sure plenty of people won't RTFA, the good professor is referring to jailing those people who fall for scams in which they believe they are aiding embezzlers in order to get rich. It'll never happen of course, but it's not that unreasonable either really.

    Somehow being a greedy criminal is OK as long as you're dumb enough to wind up as the victim in the attempt.

    --
    Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    1. Re:Just to be clear... by pushing-robot · · Score: 1

      Somehow being a greedy criminal is OK as long as you're dumb enough to wind up as the victim in the attempt.

      Well, that's how it works on TV.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    2. Re:Just to be clear... by hkz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry, but the victims are innocent until proven guilty. They haven't _yet_ undertaken anything criminal, just arguably shown intent. I don't want to be a stickler, but that means they get the benefit of the doubt.

    3. Re:Just to be clear... by Cathoderoytube · · Score: 5, Informative

      It really depends on which scam you fall victim to.
      Take this case of a hapless drug addict who called the cops after she was sold fake cocaine. They arrested her on drug charges despite the lack of any real cocaine.

      http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293112,00.html

      --
      I have nothing compelling to say
    4. Re:Just to be clear... by Corbets · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, intent can be a crime as well. Ever hear of "attempted murder"? Intent to commit a crime is a crime in most cases.

      I'm actually for jailing people in such cases. Why should anyone else, be it insurance companies or the general public or whoever, be responsible for the costs of their mistakes? Throw them in the slammer, put it on the news, and watch the success of these schemes sink far far lower.

      (IANAL, but I watched Matlock on TV once. well, part of it. For as long as I could stand it.)

    5. Re:Just to be clear... by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, but the victims are innocent until proven guilty. They haven't _yet_ undertaken anything criminal, just arguably shown intent. I don't want to be a stickler, but that means they get the benefit of the doubt.

      Sure, but innocent until proven guilty != innocent

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(crime)

      In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between natural persons to break the law at some time in the future, and, in some cases, with at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement. There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect

      I'm sympathetic to the notion that getting scammed is enough punishment for these idiots, but I have no doubt that prosecuting a few of them for conspiracy to commit [crimes] would make national headlines and give the media & government an opportunity to educate the populace.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:Just to be clear... by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      Somehow being a greedy criminal is OK as long as you're dumb enough to wind up as the victim in the attempt.

      Say two guys outside a bar get in an argument and one of them moves toward the other, chest out and arm on it's way into a punch - clear to any bystander that he's trying to assault the other guy - but he's so drunk he trips on his shoelaces and breaks his nose, so the other guy just walks away. Should he be tried for assault, just because he clearly intended to commit it but was too drunk to succeed at it?

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    7. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No deal. Plenty of laws in the western world deal with crimes of intent. Attempting, and failing, to commit a crime is still a criminal act.

    8. Re:Just to be clear... by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      You're wrong.
      They have at least entered into a conspiracy, otherwise they wouldn't be "victims". So by definition, a "victim" has already committed an illegal act.

    9. Re:Just to be clear... by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Will you give the next scammer who emails you the "benefit of the doubt"?

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    10. Re:Just to be clear... by Harin_Teb · · Score: 0

      sure they have. Attempt is defined as making a substantial step towards the completion of the crime. I would argue that by providing the Scammer with their money / bank account they have taken such a step.

    11. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just because they have a hardon for drug busts, due to the money they make off of it. They probably got to seize her assets, too.

    12. Re:Just to be clear... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Are you certain that locking them up is cheaper than ignoring them?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    13. Re:Just to be clear... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but the victims are innocent until proven guilty. They haven't _yet_ undertaken anything criminal, just arguably shown intent.

      They absolutely have undertaken something criminal: conspiracy to commit a crime IS a crime in most countries, whether the conspiracy carries it out or not.

      Clearly they're innocent until proven guilty in a court of law -- and the trail of e-mails and the documentation they sent the scammer provides the evidence that is needed to convict them. IMO, this is a reasonable idea. Throw a couple of people in prison for responding to these scams, give the action a lot of press, and everyone else will suddenly realize that they're endangering not just their money, but their freedom.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    14. Re:Just to be clear... by I'm+not+really+here · · Score: 1

      Attempted fraud and money laundering is not a crime? What if you work in accounting, and a good friend and coworker came up to you and said "hey, I've been embezzling money from this company for years, but I can't seem to get the money out of my off shore account without someone from this company calling in and saying that all of the transactions were authorized, and prove it by sending one final transaction for a measly $500. If you'll call this number, transfer the money, and sign off on it, I'll cut you in for $50,000. You can then put the money back into the company, scrub the books and the database, and no one will be the wiser. Interested?" and you say yes, make the phone call, transfer the money from your bank account into the company and from there to the off shore account (not necessarily illegal in and of itself, but it might get you fired), and your friend doesn't cut you in on the profits (because there were none... he just wanted to steal $500 from you), have you committed a crime? I would say yes. You lost $500 and were the "victim" of the crime, but even though your actions in and of themselves may not be a crime, your attempt to embezzle money from your company surely must be considered criminal activity, even if you did not in fact succeed in performing the embezzlement?

      --
      Before commenting on the Bible, please read it first
    15. Re:Just to be clear... by krazytekn0 · · Score: 1

      There's this silly word we like to use "attempted" like attempted murder, attempted tax-evasion, attempted fraud...Criminal is one of the only jobs that even when you fail you still earn the title!

      --
      Not all life is cyber. Extra Income
    16. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've not just arguably shown intent. They've shown intent and taken an affirmative, concrete step to execute that plan. In fact, they've taken the last step necessary to complete the scheme, and it is only the fortutitous fact that it was all a scam that prevented them from actually participating in embezzlement/fraud. In the USA (and I assume also Australia) that is enough to get you for both attempt and conspiracy.

      IANAL, but IAALS.

    17. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Father and mother are two more...

    18. Re:Just to be clear... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, intent can be a crime as well. Ever hear of "attempted murder"? Intent to commit a crime is a crime in most cases.

      If I go to a gun store and tell them I'm buying the gun to kill my wife, I can not be charged with attempted murder. I have to actually try to commit a crime. It also has to be a crime. So I could buy a gun, go to a Disney movie and open fire at the screen trying to kill Mickey. Again, I tried to kill "someone" and failed, yet I couldn't be charged with attempted murder. Helping someone that never committed fraud to recover money that doesn't exist by bribing people who don't exist with money that will never change hands is being defrauded, but not a criminal. They are not attempting to commit a real crime, they are falsely conspiring with a fraudster to commit nothing. It doesn't matter if they don't know that. Conspiring to kill Mickey isn't a crime either. Why? Because Mickey isn't real and can't be killed, so conspiring to kill Mickey *can't* be a crime.

    19. Re:Just to be clear... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If I decide to kill Mickey the Mouse and I get people to help me kill Mickey, is that a conspiracy? What's the crime that we are conspiring to do? Conspiracy is when multiple people get to gather to commit a crime. Well, in this case, one person is "conspiring" with someone else to commit fraud, and the other is "conspiring" to commit bribery/embezzlement/whatever. They are not getting together to commit a criminal act. Both people are entering in with the intent to commit different crimes. Also the person being defrauded is conspiring to commit no crime. They aren't conspiring to bribe anyone, because there is no chance of the successful conspiracy bribing anyone. They aren't conspiring to commit or assist someone who committed embezzlement, because no embezzlement has occured and none will occur, even with a successful conspiracy. They are "conspiring" with a criminal, but even if 100% successful, no crimes would have been committed at all by them or on their behalf. Just like a conspiracy to kill Mickey can't be a crime because homicide requires you kill a person, the people being defrauded can't commit a crime because the crimes they are trying to commit can't take place and area against ficticious people and places fabricated by a fraudster.

    20. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arrested != Convicted.

      Police have extremely wide powers to perform arrests. This doesn't mean you'll be convicted in court.

    21. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless the guy was so drunk that there was no chance he would succeed I would call that assault.

      Generally in the US as far as physical violence goes:
      Assault = attempting to commit physical violence against someone
      Assault and battery = actually commiting physical violence against someone.

    22. Re:Just to be clear... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Attempted fraud and money laundering is not a crime?

      It is not in this case. If I watch Robocop and think that OCP should be brought down, and I get together with some friends and we try to find a way to break into OCP and steal from them, is that a crime? We have a group of people conspiring to commit a crime. But wait, the crime, if everything goes well, *can't* happen. Why? Because the people they are attempting to defraud don't exist. Since the crime can't be committed, attempting it can't be a crime.

    23. Re:Just to be clear... by I'm+not+really+here · · Score: 1

      So someone who attempts to meet with an undercover cop that he believes is a 14 year old girl can't be arrested, because if everything went well, he would not have committed a crime? The girl he attempted to commit statutory rape with doesn't exist... yet the man is still arrested. Seems like the logic could apply to other areas too...

      --
      Before commenting on the Bible, please read it first
    24. Re:Just to be clear... by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Having the intent is not criminal, but acting with the intent is even if the act is unsuccessful.

    25. Re:Just to be clear... by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      That's a somewhat separate issue to whether it should be considered a crime. It is a very good point, though. Probation makes more sense than immediate jail time for anyone who's not a threat to repeat their crimes anyway.

    26. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The authorities in the US use the same methods that Nigerian scamers use to catch pedafiles: Tell them lies (I'm 17yo and I want to meet you), get them to meet at a specific place at a specific time, then arrest them. Proving intent is more than enough to get a conviction.

    27. Re:Just to be clear... by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Here's basically how it works here. Perhaps he gets arrested for assault (threatening), but definitely not battery (causing damage to a person through force). More likely, he'd get something for being drunk and disorderly, disturbing the peace, or something like that if someone actually reports it. The guy who stepped closer intending to also fight might also be arrested for the same if the police need to show up.

      The police might send both home, might arrest both, or might arrest one. It might be based as much on their provocation and argumentative nature with the police as with each other if they actually get arrested. Once the police arrest them, if that happens, then the court gets to hear from the people themselves, the police, and possibly other witnesses before anyone can even go to trial, let alone be convicted.

    28. Re:Just to be clear... by jpatters · · Score: 1

      You are engaging in some mental gymnastics here. I think you should check with a lawyer before going into the gun store and telling them that you are buying the gun to kill your wife, because I'm not so sure that that isn't enough to get you arrested and convicted. I certainly wouldn't want to be sitting before a jury of my peers with those facts presented to them. I think that not only are the victims of the scams here complicit of fraud, I think it is bordering on being a Crime Against Humanity to conspire to plunder money from a third world country where the people are living in abject poverty because of the well known corruption of the actual government officials, even if the person you are dealing with turns out not to be a genuine one of those corrupt officials.

      --
      "Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
    29. Re:Just to be clear... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The nice thing is that most things people are prosecuted for in that case are crimes, not attempted crimes. Attempted murder is not being charged with attempting and failing to commit the crime of murder, but successfully committing the actual crime of attempted murder. That is a distinction that is lost when people say "he attempted and failed to commit a crime, but was charged anyway." Most of the Internet laws and child protection laws are new enough that the attempt is listed as an actual crime. Conspiracy to commit a theft is a crime because conspiracy is a crime, but attempted theft is not a crime because it is not a crime to attempt to commit a crime (unless specified in the law, then it isn't the attempt that is prosecuted, but the successful completion of the crime of "attempted whatever"). As for the Internet stuff, I believe it is illegal to cross state lines with the intent of having sex with someone underage. Whether they are willing, whether they are real, or any of that doesn't matter. Crossing state lines while having a thought is the crime being prosecuted. All the other words about sex, children, etc. are to distract from the fact that they are prosecuting a thought crime.

    30. Re:Just to be clear... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I think you should check with a lawyer before going into the gun store and telling them that you are buying the gun to kill your wife, because I'm not so sure that that isn't enough to get you arrested and convicted.

      For what? Attempted murder? If that's all it takes, then people should be convicted off Google searches and nothing else. Attempted murder requires you actually attempt it, not just plan in. What you could have mentioned is that you could be tried for conspiracy to commit murder, since the clerk would have knowingly been a conspirator and probably would face no trouble in selling you the gun then immediately reporting it. But again, I worded my statements carefully in that, despite any other crimes you may be committing at that point, "attempted murder" is not one of them. But you seem to be caught in the trap that so many are. If you prove yourself to be a bad person, and you are caught for anything, you should be sent to jail, even if it you aren't charged with something you actually did.

      I think it is bordering on being a Crime Against Humanity to conspire to plunder money from a third world country where the people are living in abject poverty because of the well known corruption of the actual government officials, even if the person you are dealing with turns out not to be a genuine one of those corrupt officials.

      Then they should be given a medal, because instead of making it poorer, they actually make it richer. And Nigeria is a special case. They aren't poor. They have lots of oil and could be a rich country like the middle east. However, it is precisely because of the corruption that they are causing their own troubles. They are not poor, and make no mistake that they are. Sure, a majority of the people there could be living in poverty, but that doesn't mean the nation itself is poor. But again, perceptions of those looking down on others lets people like you make judgements on all around them. And don't let facts get in the way of that.

    31. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intended money-laundering is a crime. People have been sentenced for it. (in 2002)
      http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article418621.ece

      (and google-somewhat-translated: http://tinyurl.com/6fbjde )

    32. Re:Just to be clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are aware that many men over the age of 18 have been jailed and placed on national sexual offender list for attempted sexual encounters with a minor under almost identical circumstances.
            Most of these guys were actually talking to much MUCH older police officers, who were just pretending to be minors. So they were only "thinking" they were talking to a underage person, this is an exact parallel to our scam victims who just THINK they are talking to someone who'll give them money if they help them steal/wash stolen funds.

      I think if this is good enough for the alleged 'sexual offenders' it should be good enough for attempted fraudsters. I think we should create an online registry where we have their picture and alleged crime details. Also make them register and prevent them from living xx feet from schools, churches, and public parks...

    33. Re:Just to be clear... by maxume · · Score: 1

      I don't like laws that cannot be practically enforced; if the law can't be enforced, it shouldn't be a law.

      I suppose it might be cheaper to prosecute and put on probation everyone who tried to participate in a scam (cheaper than just ignoring them), but I wouldn't take it as being true on faith alone (and if it isn't cheaper than ignoring them, I'm not prepared to call it practical).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    34. Re:Just to be clear... by rtechie · · Score: 1

      The "good professor" wants to blame everyone but the Nigerian government because he's probably in on it. The scams are a big source of money for the criminals who run the government in Nigeria, he's a government official, therefore his salary is paid by the scams.

      The solution is to either impose sanctions on Nigeria (like cutting them off the internet) until they extradite criminals and/or just send agents and bounty-hunters to Nigeria to kidnap them.

    35. Re:Just to be clear... by jpatters · · Score: 1

      For what? Attempted murder? If that's all it takes, then people should be convicted off Google searches and nothing else.

      Where do the words "Attempted murder" appear in my comment? I think I said "Arrested and convicted". I didn't say of what, but conspiracy sounds right to me. Walking into a gun store and saying that you will be using the gun you are buying to kill your wife is way beyond Googling "kill wife hitman".

      And Nigeria is a special case. They aren't poor. They have lots of oil and could be a rich country like the middle east. However, it is precisely because of the corruption that they are causing their own troubles. They are not poor, and make no mistake that they are. Sure, a majority of the people there could be living in poverty, but that doesn't mean the nation itself is poor.

      That seems to be exactly my point. You might want to try actually reading what I wrote.

      --
      "Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
    36. Re:Just to be clear... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You might want to try actually reading what I wrote.

      You'll have to excuse me. From your acerbic tone, I thought you were disagreeing with me. Instead, you agrteed with everything I said, but did so in a tone that indicated the opposite. Perhaps next time you are in 100% agreement with someone, you could try to express it in a tone that gets your point across.

    37. Re:Just to be clear... by frazzle1 · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to disagree with him on this. What the guy *actually* said was that people who were prepared to commit illegal acts (e.g. claim someone else's inheritance, receive a share of funds embezzled via over-invoicing) should be jailed. I guess that it's like 'attempted fraud' or 'conspiring to commit fraud' -- it is illegal to try to do something illegal, even if you don't succeed. OTOH, I would like to hear the High Commissioner's thoughts on what should happen to the Nigerian end of these scams. And what he, as an apparently concerned and relatively powerful member of the administration, is doing about that. And also what to do about lottery, romance, car-sales, house-rental, hotel-booking, puppy, employment, money-recovery, etc, etc scams, where the victim is doing NOTHING illegal at all. For simplicity, I'm willing to overlook the representative' cheque-cashing scams, where the victim may not be aware that what they're trying to do is illegal, or the 'hitman' extortion scams, where the victim is trying to save his life.

  10. He went on to say... by Ren.Tamek · · Score: 1

    On a brighter note, Agbi went on to say how wonderful it was that our reporter had won the first true Nigerian national lottery. After his small down payment clears he will soon be the proud recipient of 1 million Nigerian dollars! Congratulations John.

    --
    "If you want a vision of the future, Winston, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever." - George Orwell, 1984
  11. You can't jail people for stupidity. by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

    Who would guard them? All of us are stupid from time to time. And according to the statistics I just made up, 80% of all people are chronically stupid.

    1. Re:You can't jail people for stupidity. by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      RTFA. He isn't suggesting people be jailed for stupidity, he's suggesting they be jailed for willingly aiding in a crime (or at least believing they are).

      It's articles like this where the summary has completely missed the point that really highlights just how bad slashdotters are when it comes to reading articles. TFA is short and clear about the what the man was really suggesting and yet already some 90% of (non-joke) comments are about how stupidity isn't a crime.

      And shame on the slashdot editor who posted this. I can't believe anyone could miss the point of the article so badly, so either he didn't read it or he deliberately went with a misleading summary for the extra "outrage" comments.

      I'll post the pertinent bit here to save everyone the terrible inconvenience of clicking the article link:

      In one version, the scammer poses as a government worker who has embezzled millions of dollars and is offering victims a percentage if they help retrieve the money by providing a relatively small amount of money for bribes or other charges.

      Professor Olu Agbi said "greedy" Australians who tried to partake in these crimes - even though they are scams - should be arrested as well.

      "People who send their money are as guilty as those who are asking them to send the money," he said.

      Not so outrageous now is it?

      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    2. Re:You can't jail people for stupidity. by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

      Not arguing against the article, more against the motion amongst most slashdotters responding to it.

    3. Re:You can't jail people for stupidity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll post the pertinent bit here to save everyone the terrible inconvenience of clicking the article link:

      Screw you! I'm still not going to read it.

      I have my standards.

    4. Re:You can't jail people for stupidity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well put. We are in agreement. RTFA should be the rule. Even so, I was having some fun toying with the idea of running for public office on a platform of long prison sentences for stupid poeple. I'd run on the Republican ticket obviously; as they do seem to have a genuine affinity for throwing folks in jail for all the wrong reasons and very few of the right ones.

    5. Re:You can't jail people for stupidity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry to post a "me too", but you stole my thunder.

      I would agree, in principle, to punishing those who are guilty of "conspiracy to commit" a crime. IANAL, so I'm not really sure how conspiracy charges work when the crime never existed.

      The problem with this, outside of principle, is that punishing people who do this would deter victims from admitting to having been duped. It also would be hard to separate out those with genuinely criminal intent from those who seek to play with the scammers.

    6. Re:You can't jail people for stupidity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's outrageous not because of his belief that people intending to cause fraud (though never actually having the opportunity to do so) should be jailed.

      It's outrageous because it describes somebody, anybody, from Nigeria's government calling for those who participate in the scams to be sent to jail. Nigeria, a country which quite possibly derives a significant portion of its income from these scams and has been supposedly permitting them with a knowing wink and nod.

      According to UPenn's Security advisory page(http://www.upenn.edu/computing/security/advisories/419scam.php), "Although the Nigerian government claims to be cracking down on them, it is commonly believed that they are actually protecting the scammers, in fact, many believe that Nigerian government officials are the scammers. Whether this is true or not, it has been alleged that the reason the Nigerian government allows the scam to continue is that *it is estimated to be the third or fourth largest source of revenue for the Nigerian economy* [emphasis not sic]."

      So, yes, it's outrageous that anybody in the Nigerian government could pretend to call for the jailings of others for participating.

    7. Re:You can't jail people for stupidity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry pal, but it's still Nigerians being criminals and a Nigerian politician official defending it, because their whole economy rides on fraud. They are like some evil version of Switzerland. I am part black with African relatives but that doesn't change my feelings about what those people in that country do. They need to be held responsible, and we should send troops in to shut them down.

  12. Though not jail-worthy... by mark0 · · Score: 1

    ...many are greedy and get what they deserve, if not far more. I was an adopted child and never once believed my "real" parents were royalty. I remain unaffected by similar fantasies later in life. That said, many elderly do not have the cognitive function required to identify these scams for what they are... many suffer at the hands of these fraudsters and deserve neither jail, nor the financial loss.

  13. SCO scam is also applicable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    SCO is also part of the internet scam sphere. Jail SCO victims too.

  14. Gday by $0.02 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mate, My name is Steve Oakland of Sydney Australia. Recently I have received a large sum of USD 25,000,000 from Mr Aruba of Nigeria. However due to some new legislation I may be having some problems with our bottom-up laws. So I have to transfer that money to a third country ASAP. I will offer you 20% of the money in exchange for your small inconvenience, 70% will be for me, and 10% for the transaction costs ...

    --
    If enithin kan gow rong it whil. (Murfey)
    1. Re:Gday by kesuki · · Score: 1

      you know, i get those in arabic every day, and i don't even READ arabic. plus they get past my spam filter, which doesn't understand international fonts.

    2. Re:Gday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gimme Gimme Gimme. I bank with CBA my acct number is....

      Cheers, mate.

    3. Re:Gday by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      You forgot to convert that into Nigerian Math:

      30% for you (the sucker)
      15% for transaction costs ($3,750,00 for a wire transfer?!?!?!?)
      25% for charity
      75% for me (the scammer)
      -----------
      100%

    4. Re:Gday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bottom Up laws? Government mandated keg stands? Where do I sign?

    5. Re:Gday by suck_burners_rice · · Score: 1

      Your proposition makes perfect sense. After all, I commonly pay a 10% fee to transfer millions of bucks around. Why, just the other day, I transferred a billion bucks from here to Uranus and back just for the heck of it. The fee for the first transfer was a hundred million bucks. The return transfer cost slightly less at ninety million bucks. Out of the billion, there are eight hundred and ten million bucks left. (That's a lot of antelope to ship around.)

      --
      McCain/Palin '08. Now THAT's hope and change!
    6. Re:Gday by armanox · · Score: 1

      I've also gotten several in Chinese/Japanese that slip right through as well.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    7. Re:Gday by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      Bah! I knew you were a fraud, since your name isn't Bruce.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    8. Re:Gday by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      I don't get the cool spam :( *sniff*

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    9. Re:Gday by toby · · Score: 1

      I bet you're really pissed at having paid to have them translated.

      --
      you had me at #!
  15. Slightly out of context by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the comment that the "victims" should be jailed was only directed at those involved in a scam claiming that someone had embezzled cash from the government and was trying to offload it.

    It wasn't directed at the kind souls who want nothing more than to help a prince reclaim his rightful spot on the the throne of Nigeriatown, for the low low price of 500 USD!

  16. iReal? by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    The very idea that a real flesh-and-blood Nigerian diplomat actually exists feels so strange. It would be like meeting the real Duke Nukem.
         

    1. Re:iReal? by Da+Cheez · · Score: 1

      He exists! He sent me this email:
      "Hello, my namme is Duke Nukem and I am wanting to send you a free copy of Duke Nukem Forever. Yes this game is real it is not a hoax. To do this, all I need is all your bank account informations and all your credit card informations. This is not a scam, I am not Nigerian or a diplomat intent on disrupting soap operas. I am really sending you game."
      I'm so excited about this! I sent him my information immediately.

    2. Re:iReal? by raehl · · Score: 1

      It would be like meeting the real Duke Nukem.

      As long as you don't mind waiting forever, it could happen.

    3. Re:iReal? by Iskender · · Score: 1

      The very idea that a real flesh-and-blood Nigerian diplomat actually exists feels so strange. It would be like meeting the real Duke Nukem.

      Now imagine what it's like being a real Nigerian prince on the Internet.

    4. Re:iReal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The very idea that a real flesh-and-blood Nigerian diplomat actually exists feels so strange.

      It's not a real diploman, just a nigger in a expensive suit.

  17. How about this idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cut off all foreign humanitarian aid to Africa and let them scam their "aid" out of us online via email scams.

  18. Fraud is fraud. by Vellmont · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is simply an argument to try to divert blame. I don't really care that the other side is a willing victim. Fraud is fraud, and I have a hard time believing that the Nigerian goverment is really doing all that much about it. Nigeria is a Kleptocracy, so corruption is endemic in the society. I'm sure a few well placed bribes keeps the cops away. It's not really that hard to find these guys after all since the money eventually has to go somewhere.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:Fraud is fraud. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      Well, expel him and encourage other countries to do so. If they continue, invade and get rid of the problem.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    2. Re:Fraud is fraud. by Maelwryth · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      According to your link:

      "A kleptocracy (sometimes cleptocracy, occasionally kleptarchy) (root: klepto+kratein = rule by thieves) is a term applied to a government that extends the personal wealth and political power of government officials and the ruling class (collectively, kleptocrats) at the expense of the population. A kleptocratic government often goes beyond mere cronyism and nepotism, or awarding the prime contracts and civil service posts to relatives or personal friends rather than the most competent applicants. They also create projects and programs at a policy level which serve the primary purpose of funneling money out of the treasury and into the pockets of the executive with little if any regard for the logic, viability or necessity of those projects."

      The primary difference between the American government and the Nigerian government is the word thieves.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
    3. Re:Fraud is fraud. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You used a big word, but everywhere else they call that bigotry.

      It's like saying eastern Europeans would steal the siding off your house for a few dollars, they don't know how to line up, and they don't think the rules apply to them.

      It's true, but you can't SAY it.

    4. Re:Fraud is fraud. by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      I have a hard time believing that the Nigerian goverment is really doing all that much about it.
       
      30 years ago I received my first Nigerian Scam letter. Air mail, and actually from Nigeria. I still remember it clearly. It was well typed on a sheet of official stationery, and stated that the sender had money from overcharging on a Nigerian government contract that he wished to get out of the country.
       
      I found the address for the Nigerian Consulate in my country and mailed the letter to them, along with a note stating that if this was a scam they should look into arresting the sender, and if it wasn't a scam they should arrest the sender for stealing money from their government.
       
      I received no response whatsoever from the consulate.
       
      And this was 30 years ago when the Nigerian Scam was new and few had ever seen it before.
       
      The Nigerian government wasn't interested in investigating and prosecuting anyone back then when scams were small-time and when they might have actually been able to deal with it before it got to be the Nigerian national industry.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    5. Re:Fraud is fraud. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Corruption is endemic because it's a kleptocracy? surely it's a kleptocracy because corruption is endemic.

      Or is there an exam you have to pass?

      As it goes, I think people who are scammed by people offering them an obviously illegal opportunity do, in fact, deserve the scrutiny of the law.

    6. Re:Fraud is fraud. by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Exists cops in Nigeria? I do not think so

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  19. Interesting theory. by LaminatorX · · Score: 1

    I suppose in the classic 419 scam the victim thinks he's conspiring to launder money. I wonder though, who would press charges?

    1. Re:Interesting theory. by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      "The people", as in, "The People of the United States vs. Larry Flynt". IOW, the government prosecutes crimes because they are crimes. Civil law is interested in making the victim whole. Criminal law is interested in prosecuting the crime as a deterrent, punishment, and possibly as a chance to reform.

  20. I just got an email about this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nigerian High Commissioner Olu Agbi said if I don't send him $1,000 by Western Union in the next 24 hours that he'll throw me in jail!

  21. Still a bit by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Not so outrageous now is it?

    If you go up to a cop who is posing as a prostitute on the street and make an offer you're going to get busted.

    If you're at home and a cop calls you, posing as a prostitute, makes you an offer, and you accept, you're not going to wind up busted (for long, anyway).

    So, this is somewhere in between. We should therefore arrest the victim's parents for raising such dolts.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Still a bit by mdfst13 · · Score: 1

      The part that you're missing is that neither party is a cop in this. The point of entrapment is that the law officials can be really aggressive about getting the other person involved, after all, they aren't going to be prosecuted. Further, it's quite possible that the crime would not occur at all without the actions of law enforcement.

      This isn't between your two situations; it's on an entirely different line. A better way of thinking about this is "What if it wasn't a scam?" If there really was a Nigerian trying to smuggle money out of the country, could you prosecute the other participant? If so, then the fact that it is a scam in this case is irrelevant. The victim would have acted in the same way if it had been real (to them it was).

      The downside to prosecuting the victim is that it would lead to less victims coming forth. This would be clearly to the benefit of the Nigerian official (who has to do work when a scam is reported). However, it would make it less likely that the scammers on the Nigerian side would get caught. Thus, future victims would be more likely.

      I would propose the following compromise. Victims who come forward on their own, don't get prosecuted. However, if the Nigerians discover additional victims when they arrest the scammers, those people should get prosecuted (especially if they don't realize that they have been victimized yet).

    2. Re:Still a bit by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you offer to take a cop posing as a hooker to dinner there's nothing illegal about that. Even to offer to have mutually consensual sex with no exchange of money is not a crime. If you're in a jurisdiction with an overzealous police department, you might get arrested for such actions "because he knew she was a hooker", but a good lawyer would break the case to tiny pieces.

    3. Re:Still a bit by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you offer to take a cop posing as a hooker to dinner there's nothing illegal about that. Even to offer to have mutually consensual sex with no exchange of money is not a crime.

      You're right. I didn't think my comment could have been interpreted this way, though.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  22. Sounds like familiar logic here on /. by unassimilatible · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First Slashdotters blame copyright holders for not protecting their works better. Then it is Nigerians blaming scam victims. What's next? Don't lock your door, you deserve to be robbed? And women who dress provocatively deserve to be raped?

    Isn't this the same Web site that wants the government to intervene to lower the price of Windows, or supports early iphone adopters who paid the stupid tax suing Apple because they had the audacity to lower prices?

    I'm all for passing a Digital Consumer Rights Act to protect fair use and end user licensees, but some of the amoral "logic" here boggles the mind. If it is bad for Microsoft or Sony to rip off consumers, it's bad for you to rip off them.

    --
    Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
    1. Re:Sounds like familiar logic here on /. by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      The point is that a lot of these scams, if they were legitimate, would involve the victim committing a crime (typically either fraud or embezzlement) in order to obtain the money. The fact that it is a scam doesn't change that.

    2. Re:Sounds like familiar logic here on /. by the_womble · · Score: 1

      Isn't this the same Web site that wants the government to intervene to lower the price of Windows, or supports early iphone adopters who paid the stupid tax suing Apple because they had the audacity to lower prices?

      How do you get opinions from the site? Do you mean the opinions of different people who frequently disagree with each other.

      Personally, I do not the government to intervene to lower the price of Windows: I want changes to competition, copyright and patent laws that would make the market more competitive which may or may not lead to lower prices (it may lead to more features, and certainly to more consumer choice). As for the people suing Apple, no one forced them to buy an Iphone, there are plenty of alternatives.

    3. Re:Sounds like familiar logic here on /. by Grym · · Score: 1

      I'm all for passing a Digital Consumer Rights Act to protect fair use and end user licensees, but some of the amoral "logic" here boggles the mind. If it is bad for Microsoft or Sony to rip off consumers, it's bad for you to rip off them.

      I think what we're seeing here is a disconnect between the law and the beliefs of the people. In short, we are in a period of a very large political struggle (or perhaps transition is a better word) where old paradigms, descriptors, and values may not apply.

      Were the French people vicious to the nobility and lawless during the French Revolution? You bet. Were speakeasies not hedonisticly breaking the law during Prohibition? Of course. But were either immoral? I don't think that the answer is very clear-cut. Would democracy in Frace have taken root were it not for the French taking up arms? Would Prohibition have ended were it not for speakeasies demonstrating how ineffective, unenforceable, and out-of-touch the law was? Similarly, I think you need to ask yourself whether real copyright and patent reform will ever take place simply from the goodwill of the legislature and industry.

      -Grym

    4. Re:Sounds like familiar logic here on /. by gsslay · · Score: 1

      It's not the same thing. In most cases of Nigerian scams the victim believes they are colluding in something illegal, or at best shady. They rely on the victim's willingness to enter into a deal that ultimately involves ripping off someone else, even if it is government, faceless corporation, or some other oblivious third party. Hence the need for utmost secrecy; don't tell your family, don't tell your bank.

      There's a saying "It's hard to con an honest man" for a reason. If you are honest you would begin by questioning the legality of it. The victims that fall for it don't.

      Do the scam victims deserve jail? Probably not, unless of course it wasn't their money they lost. But otherwise their own loss and stupidity is punishment enough.

  23. "Professor Olu Agbi" by raybob · · Score: 1

    Yeah, right.

  24. Honest people are easy to scam. Just not this scam by WK2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Honest people are the easiest to scam. People tend to project their attributes onto others, and honest people tend to be more trusting than the rest of us. Although an honest person would certainly not fall for this scam.

    Scamming honest people makes for poor movies. Their is only one double-cross, and no twists. It's too easy.

    --
    Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
  25. Conspiracy to commit fraud??? by sribe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's may be harsh, but he's got a point. If you actually bother to read any of these things, they often do sound like getting the fortune out of the country involves breaking the local laws. Just because your partner screws you does not immediately render you innocent if you were in fact plotting illegal activity.

  26. This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Jailing the victim is asinine and a sure sign that the authorities are lazy and stupid themselves.

    How is this any different to saying that a girl that goes into a rough neighbourhood in a mini-skirt and is raped should also be jailed? Just because someone puts themself in a position where they are easy prey doesn't mean that we should lash out against them if we find it difficult to prosecute the criminal.

    What they'll do is make it a crime to send money. A few years ago they made it illegal in NSW, Australia to leave your car unlocked. The rationale was that stolen cars were being used to commit crime and a deterent was needed to stop people making their cars easy to steal. Never mind the inconvenient fact that glass windows are trivial to break. Personally I think this had more to do with car insurance fraud than a crime epidemic. So now rushing to work and forgetting to lock your car makes you a criminal, rather than just making you negligent (and possibly causing you to forfeit an insurance claim).

    I think people who don't understand their role as a public servant and propose solutions like making a victim a criminal should be sacked, if not jailed themselves.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it would be more similar to jailing the prostitute who was raped for prostitution.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    2. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by I'll+Provide+The+War · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "How is this any different to saying that a girl that goes into a rough neighbourhood in a mini-skirt and is raped should also be jailed?"

      TFA:

      In one version, the scammer poses as a government worker who has embezzled millions of dollars and is offering victims a percentage if they help retrieve the money by providing a relatively small amount of money for bribes or other charges.

      Professor Olu Agbi said "greedy" Australians who tried to partake in these crimes - even though they are scams - should be arrested as well.

      Wearing a mini-skirt is not illegal. International money laundering and bribing foreign officials are both illegal. There is the difference.

    3. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Compuser · · Score: 1

      The analogy is wrong. The girl in the miniskirt has done nothing wrong and has not attempted to do anything wrong (unless she lives in Saudi Arabia). But if this same girl is approached by a guy with a sex for money offer, goes with him to a dark alley and is then raped, she should definitely go to jail for prostitution even if no money was exchanged (assuming prostitution is illegal in that locale), just as the rapist should go to jail for rape.

    4. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is this any different to saying that a girl that goes into a rough neighborhood in a mini-skirt and is raped should also be jailed?

      The difference is that walking around in a miniskirt, and even visiting your lover and having sex, is not illegal (certain middle-eastern countries notwithstanding).

      But one of those "help me get money out of the country" scans, if it were a real legitimate proposition, is still very much illegal, in that if it were ever carried out all parties involved could be found guilty of money laundering and such.

    5. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 0

      goes with him to a dark alley and is then raped, she should definitely go to jail for prostitution

      You know I'm no fan of prostitution, but I have to say that shows a complete lack of compassion.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    6. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by RedWizzard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Jailing the victim is asinine and a sure sign that the authorities are lazy and stupid themselves.

      Most of these scams basically boil down to "give me $ and together we can steal/embezzle/defraud $$$". So the "victim" hands over $ and then the conman vanishes. But the "victim" willingly joined a conspiracy to commit a crime. Joining a conspiracy is often a crime in itself even if the "actual" crime never occurs. The scams usually present the crime as victimless (owner of the money deceased, no inheritors) or morally justified (money from an evil regime), but anyone with a minimal degree of honesty can still see that it is wrong.

      How is this any different to saying that a girl that goes into a rough neighbourhood in a mini-skirt and is raped should also be jailed?

      Totally different. The girl in the mini-skirt is totally innocent, the "victim" of these scams is usually not totally innocent. It's really no different than if I say to you "give me $50 so I can buy a lockpick and then we'll rob this house together" and then disappear with your $50.

    7. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Compuser · · Score: 1

      Compassion... I'd love to discuss this some more but first, please give me a strict legal definition of it - a definition that can be used reproducibly and predictably in all criminal and civil cases.

    8. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 0

      Compassion... I'd love to discuss this some more but first, please give me a strict legal definition of it - a definition that can be used reproducibly and predictably in all criminal and civil cases.

      That topic's more suited to an ethics in law undergraduate course. You need to have a good long think about WHY we have a legal system in the first place. After all, if you want zero compassion the law of the jungle is much more efficient.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    9. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      I think it would be more similar to jailing the prostitute who was raped for prostitution.

      Actually it's more similar to the man in charge of jailing the rapist failing to do his job, then complaining and excusing his ineptness by diverting attention to the fact that the prostitute hasn't been jailed for her crime yet either.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    10. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most of these scams basically boil down to "give me $ and together we can steal/embezzle/defraud $$$". So the "victim" hands over $ and then the conman vanishes. But the "victim" willingly joined a conspiracy to commit a crime.

      Most of the victims of the crime have no understanding of either how the scam is suppose to work, nor what the scammer is offering, or they'd never part with their money. These are stupid people who don't know what they're doing and are usually negligent in checking whether it is in fact illegal rather than agreeing to commit a crime.

      It's the same as these idiots that SMS to mobile phone companies that charge for messages each way and then are inundated with hundreds of messages charged at several dollars each. Strictly speaking they agreed to download that porn snippet or ring tone or mobile phone game and are liable for the amount but it's clearly a scam nonetheless, and if the victim understood how it worked they wouldn't participate.

      Totally different. The girl in the mini-skirt is totally innocent ...until you make it a crime to wear a miniskirt, or go out late at night alone.

      the "victim" of these scams is usually not totally innocent.

      The victim of the scam is usually some poor moron that doesn't have 2 spare braincells to rub together.

      It's really no different than if I say to you "give me $50 so I can buy a lockpick and then we'll rob this house together" and then disappear with your $50.

      Except that people understand how lockpicks work and how the crime works. A better analogy would be a guy offering to help you by buying you a hunting knife if you'll help him pick one out for himself, then he steals the hunting knife from the store while you have the sales person distracted, meets you outside, robs you at knife-point, and stabs you to death.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    11. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      Wearing a mini-skirt is not illegal. International money laundering and bribing foreign officials are both illegal. There is the difference.

      Most of the scams that hit my inbox aren't so explicit about doing anything illegal. The scammer usually poses as someone owed a large sum of money but that needs assistance releasing it. You don't even have to be a complete moron to fall for this - just gullible/naive and inexperienced. Think of how you'd react to this if you'd never heard of a Nigerian scam and it was something new that just started happening. Non-techies often haven't heard of Nigerian scams.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    12. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Compuser · · Score: 1

      The criminal law exists to discourage behaviors detrimental to efficient social functioning.

      The key element of any legal system is that everyone be equal before law. The "law"of the jungle implies that the strong are exempt. Your "legal" system with built-in compassion means that the cute ones and the cry-babies are exempt. Neither is useful or even morally defensible.

    13. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      But one of those "help me get money out of the country" scans, if it were a real legitimate proposition, is still very much illegal, in that if it were ever carried out all parties involved could be found guilty of money laundering and such.

      It's perfectly legal to move money between countries if you do it through the right channels. How many people understand how to go about this though? How many "average joes" have even heard the term "Nigerian scam"? I know ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law, and I know greed is involved here, but that doesn't necessarily mean that people understand it's illegal.

      For example. My wife's no idiot. (She's a primary school teacher and she does her job well) However in some areas she's not interested in her knowledge is less than adequate, and sometimes she's too trusting. When she received a chain letter in the mail about 3 years ago, it was only because I'd drummed into her that she should look things up (at least Google them) that she became aware that in our area it's illegal to pass on a chain letter. She read about another school teacher who'd ended up with a criminal record and hefty fine (10s of thousands) doing just that. If she hadn't looked it up she'd have thought what the hell I'll give this a try. (I'm sure she'd have done that before we got together and before she had access to always on internet). It's not immediately obvious that chain letters are illegal, and not everyone that participates is intending to break the law.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    14. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jailing the victim is asinine and a sure sign that the authorities are lazy and stupid themselves.

      How is this any different to saying that a girl that goes into a rough neighbourhood in a mini-skirt and is raped should also be jailed?

      Because walking through a rough neighborhood in a mini-skirt isn't illegal?

    15. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by mike2R · · Score: 1

      I'm not certain what you mean by a chain-letter, but I assume you mean what I would call a pyramid scheme, and I agree that these could look legitimate if you don't think them through.

      But transferring large amounts of money for a huge payoff? People may miss the fact that it's a scam, but I don't believe anyone thinks it's legal, even if the email doesn't explicitly spell it out.

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    16. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't pay shouldn't it be theft of service, not rape?

    17. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Dan541 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I haven't heard of the law the you must stop at a red light, magistrate didn't buy it.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    18. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      she should definitely go to jail for prostitution

      Yes, in the same way that if criminals break into my house, kill my wife and children and beat me to within an inch of my life, I should definitely go to jail for the 1/4oz of weed the police found while examining the crime scene.

      You sir, are the asshat of asshats and I tip my asshat to your asshattery.

      (Oh, and btw most countries punish prostitution with fines or not all.)

    19. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wearing a mini-skirt is not illegal.

      Yes. Although there was the Islam Mufti of Australia who said that women in mini-skirts deserved to be raped.

      Sheikh al-Hilali, who is the Mufti of Australia, delivered his remarks to hundreds of Muslims in his mosque. He likened immodestly dressed women to meat that attracted predators and suggested that they were to blame for being set upon by men. "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street . . . and the cats come and eat it, whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem," he said.

    20. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by swillden · · Score: 1

      You don't even have to be a complete moron to fall for this - just gullible/naive and inexperienced.

      Bullshit.

      If someone offers you, a random nobody, hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars for doing a trivial amount of work, you absolutely know that there's something shady going on. Nowhere in the honest world do you make that kind of money for doing a trivial amount of simple work.

      Even if the victims don't KNOW that they're assisting in a criminal enterprise, they think they're putting one over on the world in some way.

      That said, if one of these conspirators is dumb enough that they really didn't understand, all they have to do is to convince the jury. When it comes to crimes of intent, like conspiracy, actually having the intent is a central part of what the prosecution has to prove, and they have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecutors are fairly good at evaluating cases and plea-bargaining or dropping those that are losers, so I doubt many truly stupid victims would end up in court.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    21. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by swillden · · Score: 1

      Compassion... I'd love to discuss this some more but first, please give me a strict legal definition of it - a definition that can be used reproducibly and predictably in all criminal and civil cases.

      Don't be obtuse. You know what compassion is, and so do judges, and the good ones exercise it on a regular basis.

      In this case, the compassionate but fair judge would decide that being raped was sufficient punishment for the girl's crime and give her a suspended sentence, which would of course be reinstated if she was found prostituting herself again.

      Alternatively, the DA could decide that her punishment was already adequate and choose not to charge her, but the charges can be pended up to the statute of limitations, so if she tries to sell herself again the earlier charge can be made.

      Compassion doesn't obviate justice.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    22. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by jabelli · · Score: 1

      Well, then the obvious corollary is that killing rapists and attempted rapists is at worst animal cruelty, and punishable as such.

    23. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      How is this any different to saying that a girl that goes into a rough neighbourhood in a mini-skirt and is raped should also be jailed?

      That is exactly what happens under Sharia law. Only the girl doesn't get jailed, she is stoned or hanged. Enticing men is strongly frowned upon.

      Look for this to be enacted soon in Germany, UK and maybe Australia.

    24. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Compuser · · Score: 1

      OK, what I meant to say is that she should be tried for prostitution. If the judge decides to be lenient, or the president decides to pardon her, well, that's part of due process. All I care about is that the letter of the law be followed.

    25. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Compuser · · Score: 1

      I am actually against consensual crimes (e.g. drugs and prostitution) being penalized but so long as the law against them is on the books, sure, in your scenario you should be tried (and maybe even jailed) for possession.

    26. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by swillden · · Score: 1

      You forgot the DA's option to be lenient, which would forego putting her through the trauma of a trial. That is also permissible under the letter of the law.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    27. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      I haven't heard of the law the you must stop at a red light, magistrate didn't buy it.

      This tripe is modded insightful? It's difficult to live or function in society without knowing that you must stop at a red light. It's common knowledge. It's also common knowledge you need a license to drive and in obtaining one you're required to study and become familiar with the road rules. Of course the magistrate didn't buy that you don't know that you must stop at a red light. No reasonable person would. To break this law you must have done it willfully or through negligence, not through ignorance.

      Another difference is that in most jurisdictions road rules are not laws that require intent as an element of the crime. Whereas many criminal acts do require that and a lesser crime is prescribed if the element can't be demonstrated (eg. murder vs man-slaughter)

      Now when it comes to laws that aren't the subject of common knowledge, while the law does not accept ignorance of them as an excuse, there is usually some leeway in how they are prosecuted. Prosecuting victims of a crime defeats the purpose of law protecting society as a whole UNLESS the harm they're doing to society outweighs the harm being done to themselves.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    28. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      If someone offers you, a random nobody, hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars for doing a trivial amount of work, you absolutely know that there's something shady going on. Nowhere in the honest world do you make that kind of money for doing a trivial amount of simple work.

      So you're saying that pop stars deserve millions for commercials that take less than a week to shoot?

      What about lotto? If you win lotto, is that commensurate with your sweat and toil??

      There are definitely circumstances where people make money for doing jack shit, through pure good fortune.

      Even if the victims don't KNOW that they're assisting in a criminal enterprise, they think they're putting one over on the world in some way.

      That's one hell of an attitude to have. Are you a defeatist by nature? Or into guilt? Do you whip yourself to keep yourself awake so you can pray longer?

      That said, if one of these conspirators is dumb enough that they really didn't understand, all they have to do is to convince the jury. When it comes to crimes of intent, like conspiracy, actually having the intent is a central part of what the prosecution has to prove, and they have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecutors are fairly good at evaluating cases and plea-bargaining or dropping those that are losers, so I doubt many truly stupid victims would end up in court.

      You have way too much faith in juries. It's not unheard of for juries to convict innocent people on flimsy evidence, let alone a subjective element like intent.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    29. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Money laundering is illegal, that is common knowledge.

      Ignorance isn't an excuse to do whatever you want.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    30. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      But transferring large amounts of money for a huge payoff? People may miss the fact that it's a scam, but I don't believe anyone thinks it's legal, even if the email doesn't explicitly spell it out.

      I once had a friend of a friend try to convince me that star trek warp drives were really being developed and soon we'd be traveling the stars. He was actually sane and could be convinced otherwise - he was just dumb as a brick. I've been accosted by a UFO nut on a train who insisted that non-net-connected my laptop was being used to brainwash me via the internet. His sanity I'd question. Stupid, stupid, stupid people do exist. Now unless either of these guys are a serious threat to society, while I don't want to socialize with them, I don't want them locked up or fined into a desperate corner. It's not a far stretch to imagine that these 2 people who'd escaped reality already think it's their lucky day.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    31. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      Money laundering is illegal, that is common knowledge.

      People scammed aren't smart enough to understand that they are laundering money. People that are smart enough to understand this are also usually smart enough to know not to give money to a crook, especially without security. By handing over their money they are demonstrating their ignorance and/or stupidity.

      Ignorance isn't an excuse to do whatever you want.

      You're arguing this:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorantia_juris_non_excusat

      I'll counter with this. I was looking for a quote tbat went along the lines of "the definition of oppression is having too many laws to have knowledge of" but I can't find it. This will do.

      http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/12/17/ignorance-of-the-law-is-no-excuse/

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    32. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Committing crime is ok, if you don't know what your doing?

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    33. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The girl in the mini-skirt is totally innocent

      Bullshit. They dress like that because they want to be raped, why do they pitch such a fit when it happens? They should just take their cocks, pregnancy and STDs that they were asking for and move on.

    34. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by swillden · · Score: 1

      Everyone well understands the situations where you can legitimately make lots of money for doing practically nothing. Nobody thinks that transferring money across borders on the sly is one of them. It's patently obvious that if there weren't something funny going on, the person trying to move the money would have contacted someone who typically does such things, not a random Internet e-mail address.

      The "victims" of these scams know they're putting one over on someone.

      As for the bit about juries, sure, they make mistakes. they make mistakes boths ways. Do you have a better solution for determining guilt or innocence? Whatever it is, we should clearly apply it in all cases, not just these.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    35. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by syousef · · Score: 1

      Committing crime is ok, if you don't know what your doing?

      No but it's a mitigating circumstance. The punishment should be much less if someone is unintentionally breaking the law. Otherwise all you're doing is punishing ignorance and stupidity. Do you really want to put such a large number of people in jail??? I'd much rather see the predatory wankers who perpetrate the scams prosecuted than the victims. Instead we have a man who should be involved in doing just that passing the buck, trying to divert blame onto the hapless backward schmucks that hand over their money on no more than the promise of richers, and a whole legion of rednecks applauding him. Nigerian officials seem to have no incentive to actually try to irradicate this. If it's such a big problem why isn't there any kind of education campaign being run instead of leaving it to an inaccurate and sensationalizing media?

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    36. Re:This is offensive. Stupidity is not a crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You still lose. He was using an argument that was based on something that isn't a crime, but is still outrageous, yet some people pretend it is not, therefor, his argument is stronger than yours, jackass. He wins, you lose. Nigeria sucks.

  27. You can't con an honest man. by Cerebus · · Score: 1

    'Nuff said.

    --
    -- Cerebus
  28. Yeah right by uxbn_kuribo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Like we're going to listen to Nigerian officials when it comes to money matters. Hell, they can't even keep their Princes from losing access to their fortunes, requiring honest, hard-working Americans to help them out!

    --
    No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
  29. I approve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I approve.
    -Darwin

    1. Re:I approve by ignavus · · Score: 1

      And the more stupid they become, the more stupid their children will be.

      -Lamarck.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  30. If you think Entrapment is OK... by jd.schmidt · · Score: 1

    There is a reason for laws against entrapment. Also in many of these scams they try to make it look like you are doing the "honorable" thing to help avoid some corrupt government. Now if they said something like "help use move this money so we can buy weapons and kill civilians" maybe I would be more sympathetic. A little too self serving of a comment from Nigeria.

    1. Re:If you think Entrapment is OK... by Gorshkov · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is a reason for laws against entrapment.

      Entrapment is when agents of the government - ie, law enforcement officials - trick somebody into breaking the law.

      If a cop talks somebody into breaking into a bank and then arrests him, the case will be thrown out for entrapment.

      But if I double-dog dare somebody to break into a bank and they do so, the only thing I'm guilty of is having an idiot for a friend.

    2. Re:If you think Entrapment is OK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if I double-dog dare somebody to break into a bank and they do so, the only thing I'm guilty of is having an idiot for a friend.

      And conspiracy to commit bank robbery.

      It wouldn't be entrapment unless you are a law enforcement official claiming immunity from your crime because it is part of your official duties. Even then, there are circumstances where the official can be involved but it still won't be entrapment. For example, if an undercover police officer is standing on a street corner and someone offers her money for sex, that's not entrapment. Entrapment occurs when she initiates the conversation.

    3. Re:If you think Entrapment is OK... by jd.schmidt · · Score: 1

      There is a reason for laws against entrapment.

      Entrapment is when agents of the government - ie, law enforcement officials - trick somebody into breaking the law.

      If a cop talks somebody into breaking into a bank and then arrests him, the case will be thrown out for entrapment.

      But if I double-dog dare somebody to break into a bank and they do so, the only thing I'm guilty of is having an idiot for a friend.

      Just to be clear, I know this isn't entrapment because of course the scammers aren't law officials. I am arguing against his logic. Remember the scammed are typically NOT experts in international financial law. The diplomat in question is arguing to *actually* imprison people for a crime they didn't commit AND for breaking a law they likely didn't know existed (and at least almost certainly don't understand!)

      Remember the scammed belived one part of the lie, so it is likely that they might also belive things like "I am just avoiding corrupt government officials" or even "All the risk is on my part, you are not doing anything illegal here, you are just enabling me." Do you really think the scammer is saying "you are taking a tremendous risk here because you are breaking the following laws...?"

      Maybe the scammed are being unethical in *some* (no where near all!) cases, but again this guys is arguing to imprison them. But of course he doen't really mean for this to happen, he is just providing political cover for his own country!

      As for people being scammed because they are dumb, that is in a sense true. Many people not at the top of their game get scammed. Elderly, sick or otherwise impared and/or desperate. No, if this guy wants to do the right thing, he should fight for extridition.

  31. mod parent up by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    Here in the US it's supposed to be ok to be a "stickler" about your due process rights. I'm not sure how things work down under, but my guess is it's supposed to be about the same (only bigger?)

    1. Re:mod parent up by mcvos · · Score: 1

      Here in the US it's supposed to be ok to be a "stickler" about your due process rights.

      I thought that was considered unpatriotic nowadays.

  32. it's not really a stupid tax by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    It's just a tax on people who don't understand math.

    1. Re:it's not really a stupid tax by Ravon+Rodriguez · · Score: 1

      a tax on the hopeful, a tax on the downtrodden, a tax on the people who have nothing left to lose....

      --
      Jesus loves me, he loves me a bunch, because he always puts Jiffy in my lunch.
    2. Re:it's not really a stupid tax by wellingj · · Score: 1

      ... and hope for unearned wealth.

    3. Re:it's not really a stupid tax by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      a tax on the people who have nothing left to lose

      Apparently they still had a few dollars for the lottery ticket to lose...

      (yes I guess that's a song reference but I'm the kind who prefers silence so I can hear my own thoughts)

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    4. Re:it's not really a stupid tax by crenshawsgc · · Score: 1

      ... and enjoy playing a game which, for a dollar, provides a bit of entertainment and a chance to dream about being a winner. Try analyzing any OTHER hobby as an investment? Why just pick on the lottery...

    5. Re:it's not really a stupid tax by wellingj · · Score: 1

      I like to build hobby robots, which actually helps my job performance and was a motivating factor in my last raise.

  33. He's deflecting Nigeria's stigma by banffbug · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I somehow doubt he actually believes in jailing these people. He's simply pointing out their guilt, to reduce the guilt of his own country's people.

    1. Re:He's deflecting Nigeria's stigma by Therefore+I+am · · Score: 1

      In many parts of the world women who have been raped are imprisoned for their 'Crime'. That the Nigerian High Commissioner thinks the same way about people who have been scammed does not surprise me in the least. No point in declaring him 'Persona non grata', the next one might be even worse!

    2. Re:He's deflecting Nigeria's stigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please quantify "many". Thank you.

  34. That's how you start a false narrative, thanks by Nymz · · Score: 1

    FTA - He said media coverage of fraudulent activity stemming from Nigeria had given the country "a bad image"

    He does have a point, if Australians had never reported being scammed, then Nigeria wouldn't have a bad image. Yeah, this is really all the fault of those racist Australians. This pattern reminds me of the Jena-6 myths, that were all shown to have originated from journalists that were seduced by a false narrative of racial injustice.

  35. Without 419s by merc · · Score: 1

    ... who will attend the University of Nigeria?

    --
    It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
    1. Re:Without 419s by dotgain · · Score: 1

      When 419s are outlawed, only outlaws will send money to 419'ers

  36. Nigeria: The moral center of the virtual world by A+New+Normalcy · · Score: 1

    And the diplomatic world, too.

    --
    ...Lorenzo / I'm into kinky crustaceans. I just discovered internet praWn.
  37. Attention Benificiary ( NIgerian High commision ) by meeya · · Score: 0

    It has come to our attention that you have not been received your payments yet.. please contact my secretary olumba@live.com

  38. Equivalent to entrapment by Grobstein · · Score: 1

    Punishing someone for assenting to a fake crime is equivalent to entrapment.

    People agree to what they believe is a criminal scheme. But outside of the world of elaborate illusions, they're not dangerous or criminal at all. So it's a waste to jail them.

    It would be like imprisoning someone because they _might_ commit a real crime in the future.

    1. Re:Equivalent to entrapment by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      You don't know the meaning of entrapment do you? Entrapment means *police* encourage someone to commit a crime they might otherwise not have committed. The "victims" are criminals as far as intent goes, just fairly harmless ones. Nevertheless, I agree with you. They don't need to be jailed. I think the money they lose to these scams is sufficient punishment.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
  39. Fraud, Stupid people, and lotteries. by mlwmohawk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The stupid will always be the prime target for those who will take their money. The prime candidate is, of course, government lotteries, you know, taxation for those who are lacking math skills.

    Anyone who sends money to an entity that can not be properly vetted is a greedy fool.

    Is that a criminal action? No. If we locked up everyone that was stupid and greedy, we wouldn't have any police, state level politicians, public school teachers, car salesmen, plumbers, electricians, car mechanics, etc.

    1. Re:Fraud, Stupid people, and lotteries. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am state-level politican you insensitive clod! Now give me your money!

    2. Re:Fraud, Stupid people, and lotteries. by martyros · · Score: 1

      taxation for those who are lacking math skills.

      I used to think this too; but the fact is that what the government is really selling is the enjoyment of dreaming about being rich. People buy the lottery because they find it rewarding: not monetarily, but just in the idea of possibly getting something, or possibly becoming rich. Given that there's a huge number of people out there (a "market") who are willing to "buy" this feeling, wouldn't you rather the government "sell" it (and at least do something potentially useful with the money) than have hucksters and charlatans pocket the money?

      For me it works the opposite way: I feel so stupid after paying $5 for what is essentially now just a worthless piece of cardboard, even if the odds were in my favor I might not play. :-)

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

    3. Re:Fraud, Stupid people, and lotteries. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...IT personnel...

    4. Re:Fraud, Stupid people, and lotteries. by HeadlessNotAHorseman · · Score: 1

      I object to your charecterisation of public school teachers as stupid and greedy. I can't speak for every school in Australia, but the majority of the public school teachers that I encountered in my 13 years of public education at 7 different schools were quite intelligent, and taught for the love of their jobs first, money second.

      --
      I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
  40. Text of email by xstonedogx · · Score: 5, Funny

    dont know if it's tru? forwarding just incase! love to everyone!

    >>> Nverian Hig h Commisioner Ololu Ogelvi warned all RED BLOODED AMERICAN PATRIOTS
    >>> that if they don't send him $1,000 by Western Union in the next 24 hours that he
    >>> will kill a kitt
    >>> en.

    >> Thx Maude! I just sent t>
    >> his to everyone on my ma
    >> iling list! Why does
    >>> PLEASE SUPPORT OUR TROPS IN WESTERIA
    >>> FORWARDING THIS EMAIL TO EVERYONE
    >>> YOU KNOW!!111!1!!!1!

    >>> GOD BLESS AMERICA!

    1. Re:Text of email by Repton · · Score: 1

      i tried to send the money but they didnt know ololu olgelvi. can u send me your bank acct details pls?

      --
      Repton.
      They say that only an experienced wizard can do the tengu shuffle.
    2. Re:Text of email by EdIII · · Score: 1

      It's a large sock hidden behind the washing machine. The one with the blue stripes.

    3. Re:Text of email by furbearntrout · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think I found it, but it's more of a teal color. All I could find in it was some lint. Are you overdrawn?

      --
      Crap. What did the new CSS do with the "Post anonymously" option??
    4. Re:Text of email by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      >>> PLEASE SUPPORT OUR TROPS IN WESTERIA

      Nice George Orwell reference... It's creepy how much those chain forwarded emails always seem like brainwashing government propaganda to me.

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    5. Re:Text of email by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      ROFLOLMAOPPYOMANK!!

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  41. Greetings! by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 2, Funny

    Permit me to introduce myself, my name is TheSHAD0W and I was an officer in a now defunct company that performed 419 advance fee fraud scams and was based in Nigeria. This company's bank account now holds $36 million dollars which was scammed from Australian citizens. I am the only officer who was not arrested and murdered in jail and I now seek assistance in transferring these funds to the United States. The person who will assist in transferring this money will receive $3 million dollars and my gratitude. If you are interested please email your full name, social security number, birth date, and bank routing and account number to scammer@iamadoodyhead.co.ng please.

  42. You're misreading that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    > WRONG. The scammer wants to make money from the deal. How are they going to coax the mark into giving them money when they claim to already have lots.

    He's saying that honest people are also easy to scam, but that you have to use different methods on them (e.g. via fake charity scams).

    He's not saying that the people who got scammed in 419 scams like those in this story are honest (they usually have you agree to break some financial law).

  43. I love this quote by StrahdVZ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "It is not in the character of Nigerians to be engaged in this kind of scam."

    Professor Olu Agbi said there were almost 140 million people in Nigeria and fewer than 0.1 per cent were involved.

    140,000 scammers? Gee is that all? :P

    1. Re:I love this quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So God only knows what we should do about the USA then.

    2. Re:I love this quote by Skapare · · Score: 1

      Compare that 140,000 scammers to how many Nigerians are doing legitimate international transactions (the ones that are harmed by the world's assumption that someone from Nigeria doing an international transaction is likely to be a scammer). So what is the chance any randomly picked Nigerian that is doing an international transaction is a scammer.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    3. Re:I love this quote by StrahdVZ · · Score: 1

      If I were a bookie I'd accept odds of about 140000:1

    4. Re:I love this quote by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      That's some fine arithmetic there, Lou.

    5. Re:I love this quote by Tuoqui · · Score: 1

      Somehow I also suspect that 0.1 per cent is total number of the population connected to the internet.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
    6. Re:I love this quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty good. Isn't 1% of americans in jail currently?

    7. Re:I love this quote by spfoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      In the US it was "only" 0.7% in 2003 according to http://salt.claretianpubs.org/sjnews/2003/04/sjn0304f.html [claretianpubs.org]. But hey that makes 2 million people. Wonder how the rest of the developed world is doing?

    8. Re:I love this quote by clickety6 · · Score: 1

      Please don't over exaggerate. If you read the quote correctly, you'll see it is only 139,999 scammers ;-)

      --
      ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
    9. Re:I love this quote by spfoo · · Score: 1

      Yes, that makes "fewer" than 0.1%.

    10. Re:I love this quote by StrahdVZ · · Score: 1
      I'm Australian, officially we are at roughly 0.025% prison population. Thus why I considered Nigeria's 0.1% high.

      However the country started as a convict colony 200 years ago, so we're all prisoners at heart. :P

    11. Re:I love this quote by swillden · · Score: 1

      Our prison population problem is a direct result of the War on Drugs. Tone that down to reasonable levels or, even better, legalize and regulate drugs the way we handle liquor and cigarettes, and our prisons populations would drop to reasonable levels. That would make it simple to jail conspirators in international embezzlement, money laundering and wire fraud.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    12. Re:I love this quote by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Only problem is if it involves the Internet until it moves into the real world completely, the crook gets off.

      The police pretty much refuse to both with crimes dealing with "the Internet". Why? There is no proof who exactly is behind the keyboard. How can you arrest an IP address?

    13. Re:I love this quote by swillden · · Score: 1

      In this case, it moves pretty quickly into the real world, as the victim/conspirator starts sending documents and money to the scammer.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  44. Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    Most are of the form "We found some person's money in a trust fund or something. Do you want to help shift it offshore and take a cut?". Taking something that is not yours is a crime. If you find a brown bag of cash on the side of the road, then keeping that is crime too.

    People scammed by these scams are attempting to be criminals, even if they are not succeeding.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Most are of the form "We found some person's money in a trust fund or something. Do you want to help shift it offshore and take a cut?". Taking something that is not yours is a crime. If you find a brown bag of cash on the side of the road, then keeping that is crime too.

      Its usually more a case of 'someone is being persecuted, and they need to transfer their assets away from the government persectuing them, to retain them. The mark is being solicited to HELP the scammer to KEEP his own money, and in exchange the scammer is offering to give him a cut for helping him out.

      Its often the equivalent of someone offering you a small sum of money to cash their paycheque for them after the bank is closed with some story about how they'll be evicted or something if they don't. Hell, the entire payday loans industry is based on this sort of transaction.

      People scammed by these scams are attempting to be criminals, even if they are not succeeding.

      No. Not necessarily.

    2. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      If you find a brown bag of cash on the side of the road, then keeping that is crime too.

      Claiming obviously unclaimed property such as an unmarked paper bag full of money is not a crime. Our society has a long standing tradition as such even going so far as to grant it to large claims of items such as treasure, derelict vessels at sea, etc, as "salvage rights".

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    3. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by chesapeake · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm pretty sure it is a crime in Queensland, Australia. (IANAL but I lived with two law students who I can remember studying this). You need to take it to the police station and hand it in, where, if it is unclaimed for a certain amount of time and it's not shown to be linked to a crime (e.g. proceeds of a bank robbery), you will get to keep it.

    4. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      My government persecutes me too.
      I earn a certain amount each week and the Government takes a cut, will you help me evade this?

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    5. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Different laws for different areas I suppose. I'm in the US where keeping such a bag would be legal; laws on the subject of unclaimed property can be quirky, but generally follow a "finders keepers" philosophy. Some more than others obviously. Lookup squatter's law in the UK for example: if one "legally" occupies an unoccupied building or home (ie, they don't break in) then even the owner of that building or home can't kick them out without lengthy paperwork. If the squatter lives undisturbed in such a property for 12 years then they are legally entitled to take official ownership of it.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    6. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Lookup squatter's law in the UK for example: if one "legally" occupies an unoccupied building or home (ie, they don't break in) then even the owner of that building or home can't kick them out without lengthy paperwork. If the squatter lives undisturbed in such a property for 12 years then they are legally entitled to take official ownership of it.

      There's a similar rule in most if not all U.S. states, it's called adverse possession and some places it's less than 12 years. In California you just need to occupy the land for 5 years.

    7. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by DarkProphet · · Score: 1

      Meh, lame logic. If in the U.S., you don't have to pay income tax weekly, you can wait until Apr 15 like most 1099'ers.

      --
      What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
    8. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but you then have to pay income tax quarterly.
      If you don't pay 90% of this years tax, or 100% of last years tax (whichever is smaller) you can (and will) be dinged by the IRS for the interest. This is all covered in IRS publication 505.

    9. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      In Illinois it's 20 years, it has to be well known that you're doing so, and the land owner can't have given you permission to be there (because they could then revoke that permission and all of the time beforehand wouldn't be considered adverse). It's 7 years if the one in possession of the land pays the taxes the owner would have been responsible to pay.

    10. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by vux984 · · Score: 1

      My government persecutes me too.
      I earn a certain amount each week and the Government takes a cut, will you help me evade this?

      1) Certainly. Call a tax advisor. It is their job to find and advise you of any tax loopholes you can exploit to reduce the amount the government takes from you.

      2) You cannot possibly equate north american income tax collection, with how military juntas act towards the officials they've just executed a bloody coup against.

    11. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by nomadic · · Score: 1

      In Illinois it's 20 years, it has to be well known that you're doing so, and the land owner can't have given you permission to be there (because they could then revoke that permission and all of the time beforehand wouldn't be considered adverse).

      Easiest way to safeguard yourself against adverse possession is to send your neighbor an email saying "Oh, that place where you set up your grill is actually my property, but I have absolutely no problem letting you use the area." Most states that negates the hostile requirement of adverse possession. Just save the email.

    12. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      2) You cannot possibly equate north american income tax collection, with how military juntas act towards the officials they've just executed a bloody coup against.

      Sorry I forgot, America is always right.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    13. Re:Most Nigerian scams ask you to commit a crime by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Sorry I forgot, America is always right.

      No. America is not always right.

      However, their 'persecution' of you via 'income tax' collection is NOTHING compared to some people are treated by their "government".

      Hell, if you'd claimed you were a gauntanamo bay prisoner seeking to get your assets from America to your family in Nigeria, I could even AGREE that America is, in that scenario, just as ass-backwards oppressive as Nigeria.

      However, you didn't compare the 'hypothetical Nigerian Prince' to a 'Guantanamo prisoner', you compared him to -you-, and that's simply not remotely on the same level.

  45. Sound the alarms! by ZarathustraDK · · Score: 3, Funny

    They're like...trying to outlaw natural selection!

    You are making more stupid people, please don't do it!

    Uuhh shiny...

    --
    If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
  46. close or limit western union by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    western union is the most preferred means for these scamsters. filter or close WU for a few months - things will stop momentarily, until they shift to some other means of sending money!

    this is of course a partial remedy

  47. Well except by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    That the scams often are not proposing anything illegal. My latest two (all that I have in my trash bin currently) say that I've won a lottery and that there is an estate which I am due money from. Nothing illegal in the slightest about trying to collect money in either of those situations.

    If these people were actively looking for opportunities to commit wire fraud, ok fine. However it is just unsavvy people getting duped. Often the offers are not at all illegal on the face of it, other times people might easily believe it's ok.

    I get more than a little tired of the blame the victim mentality. Especially since many geeks are notoriously un-street smart and thus fall victim to some kinds of crime much easier than many other people.

    The blame for this lies squarely on the people perpetrating these scams. Yes, it would be nice if people were better educated and didn't fall for it but guess what? Reality is not everyone is smart and even those that are smart aren't smart about every thing.

    1. Re:Well except by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 2

      But again you're missing the point and clearly haven't read the article or even my post properly. Nobody is suggesting that the victim of every E-mail scam should be imprisoned. Mr. Agbi is explicitly stating that people who fall victims of scams in which they pay money believing that they are aiding in a different crime in hopes of receiving a cut of the profits from it should face prison.

      I'm not saying I necessarily agree with that sentiment but it certainly isn't so ridiculous or outlandish as the /. summary would have you believe.

      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
  48. "Just as guilty"? by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 1

    Sounds more to me like he is making excuses for the fraudsters. "Hey, they're only scamming greedy people! Since they're greedy anyway, how is it wrong to scam them?" That's pretty much the spiel scammers spout, rationalizing their crimes by saying that the victims were just as bad they are themselves.

    --
    I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    1. Re:"Just as guilty"? by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Look at it from the point of view of each party. The scammer is out to defraud a (presumably fairly well off) individual of a few thousand dollars. The "victim" believes he is out to steal millions of dollars from an already desperately poor country. I'm not sure it's a particularly clear cut case for which is the worse offender.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
  49. the parent is a by AmishElvis · · Score: 1

    troll

  50. Heres an example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.adreinjones.com/

    Its a pretty funny site, guy responds to spam emails and pretty much gets him to do whatever he wants...pictures, voicemail, etc

  51. I'm still waiting for my DVD from Enormoushop.com by vistic · · Score: 1

    I don't know why Enormoushop.com is taking so long... I gave them all the info they requested!

  52. Re:Fucking Coward! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great point, Talkischeap! Except that either you have a very unique name or are just as anonymous as I am. Well, you spooks do tend to have some pretty funky names like Tyrone or Barack.

  53. The man has a point. by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    In many of these nigerian scams, the scamster persuades the mark to commit an illegal act. Although punishment for the victims is morally justifiable in these circumstances, I think that the loss of significant money is probably sufficient chastisement.

  54. Not so by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 2, Informative
    Have a look at some typical letters at http://www.nigerianscambuster.com/letters.html . Of those, most are asking people to help divert funds that were found in a deceased person's estate or by other means. Only one of these asks for help to keep their money because their assets are frozen (so you'd be involved in money laundering). Even that act looks pretty dodgy since they hint that the person might get killed, leaving Joe Sucker with all the money. Anyone falling for this is hardly acting in a charitable way.

    There is a huge difference in helping out someone at payday and helping a suspected criminal bypass the law. If one of those check cashing operations was helping the Mob handle their transactions they'd get stung for money laundering.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Not so by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Have a look at some typical letters at http://www.nigerianscambuster.com/letters.html . Of those, most are asking people to help divert funds that were found in a deceased person's estate or by other means.

      Yes, to an extent they all present the scammer as needing to 'bypass' some legal obstacle. =However=, that doesn't mean that doing so is actually illegal.

      For example, the one seeking to recover the deceased man's funds seems to require you to out-and-out lie, and claim you are next of kin; and its clearly immoral... and its surely illegal to claim the estate under false pretense.

      But the first one reads like the 'Nigerian National Petroleum Company' has money that it can't move directly, but there is some LEGAL loophole whereby it can funnel them through you under certain circumstances. Of course on thoughtful analysis this is obviously absurd.

      But these bizarre legal oddities DO exist, and its not categorically impossible that a company in Nigeria can't transfer the funds to a subsidiary operation in another country due to investment regulations, but for whatever reason they actually CAN subcontract and transfer funds to a foreign company. And of course, should you decide the best use of those funds is to subcontract back to a foreign subsidiary of the original company... who knows, it quite possibly could be legal. "Indeed it must be, the Nigerian CEO and his team of lawyers have obviously done their research! And even the Central Bank is assisting with the manuever.

      So a victim might reasonably rationalize that it is in fact legal. And looking at how companies game the regulations everywhere, and get away with it, it might well be.

      Take a look at the "Smith Maneuver" in Canada sometime for an example of an exploitable oddity in Canadian tax law, where by little more than shuffling some paper around you can convert a mortgage debt that is not tax deductable to a debt that is, and the banks will help you do it.

      (It involves having an investment asset that you sell, then use the proceeds to pay off your mortage. Then you take out a line-of-credit against your now paid off home to buy back the investment assets. The original mortgage interest was not tax deductable ... while the interest on the line-of-credit you used to buy back the investments is.)

      Bottom line, when it comes to regulations, it often IS the case that you can't legally do X, but you can do Y+Z which equal X. Many successful businesses and people live off finding those Y+Z combos to give them an advantage. Few people think its even immoral in most cases.

    2. Re:Not so by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      If one of those check cashing operations was helping the Mob handle their transactions they'd get stung for money laundering.

      I bet professional money laundering operations take a smaller cut.

  55. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Talkischeap · · Score: 0

    Mea culpa

    So sorry to slight you.

    But considering how rude you are pointing out my mistake, you really don't deserve an apology.

    Oh, and mister perfect... I'm fucking amerikan, so I misinterpreted your Australian slang, big fucking deal, have a cow about man.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  56. Does anyone think nigerians are trustworthy? by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    Their whole nation in mired by these scams. I would never trust a nigerian even if he was trustworthy.

    while greed itself isn't a crime, I can't help but wonder how this nigerian "official" is benefiting from these scams.

    After all, he is the nigerian high commissioner. He probably has a wonderful business opportunity for us.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  57. Re:Fucking Coward! by Talkischeap · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yes, my point was missed by most I'm sure...

    I agree, we're all AC's, even with our user names, so my point was, even then, the racists are afraid to user their regular Slash Dot accounts.

    I realize that we all have fairly traceable IP's, do they?

    Oh, and you AC are a racist baiter, but it doesn't work with me nigger (whatever color you really are, since the racist disease is all in your mind).

    And just how did you manage with your room temperature I.Q. to "out" me as black?

    That would sure as hell surprise my friends

    Go back to your mommas basement.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  58. Perhaps military action is in order. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    As much money is lost, perhaps it's time to consider military action. Given that they're attempting to hide behind a corrupt jurisdiction and they will not clean house, justification exists. That, and it provides another base of operations that isn't taken by China.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Perhaps military action is in order. by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      There's no way Nigeria could invade Australia.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
  59. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

    Oh crikey!

    Have you never worked in the white collar world?

    Most of the people there are fucking coasting!

    Work ethic, BAH!

    Sure, blame it on the poor, it's easy, they can't defend themselves.

    Way to go buster.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  60. My first scam... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oooh, I just got my first scam the other day!:

    Dear XXXXXXXX,

    I am Aziz Mohd Hossein, a legal practitioner with Hossein & Associates in Malaysia with many years of practice.

    I was an attorney to a deceased client of mine who died in Kuala Lumpur , Malaysia of a heart related disease in 2001. My reason of sending you this email is to help secure the funds left behind by my client before it is confiscated or declared unserviceable by the bank.

    This fund is valued at 19 Million dollars as per the bank statement. Since you do have the same surname With my late client, I would want to present you as the legitimate beneficiary with all legal documents required to back the claim up.

    The holding bank has issued me a notice to contact the next of kin, or the Account will be confiscated, and so far, all my efforts to get hold of someone related to this man has proved abortive.

    This is my proposal; I am asking for your consent to present you to the bank as the next-of-kin and beneficiary of my late client, since you have the same last name, so that the proceeds of this account can be paid to you. Then we can share the amount on a mutually agreed-upon percentage.I do have a good standing in Malaysia , it is my assurance that this transaction will be successful and that I will make sure that the transaction is done within the applicable laws to guarantee full legitimacy.

    All legal documents to back up your claim as my client's next-of-kin will be provided by me. All I require is your honest cooperation to enable us see this transaction through.This will be executed under a legitimate arrangement that will protect you from any breach of the law. However, if this business proposition offends your moral values, do accept my apology.

    Please contact me as soon as possible to indicate your interest. Do understand that this transaction do require utmost confidence and you should keep this mail to yourself not withstanding if you are rejecting the transaction or accepting it.

    However,if this business proposition offends your moral ethics,do accept my sincere apology.If on the contrary you wish to achieve this goal with me, kindly get back to me with your interest immediately for further details.

    Best regards,

    Respectfully,
    Aziz Mohd Hossein (ESQ)


    I just loved how he didn't even name the deceased guy on which the entire case is based, probably just easier to copy/paste for the next target...

  61. Re:Typical Nigger Response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congratulations, I think you just hit the flamebait jackpot.

  62. so-called Nigerian scams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Still doesn't excuse all the spam they send out.

    and wtf? "so-called Nigerian scams"

  63. blame the victims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are people so quick to heap abuse on the victims? "If you're so dumb, you DESERVE to be ripped off." Jail them. Idiots.

    Talk about kicking people when they're down. What the fuck is the matter with you people? Have some compassion. Yes, they should have known better, and often times break the law. But if you're dumb enough to think you might be getting money from nigeria, you MIGHT not be smart enough to realize what they're asking you to do is against the law

    Furthermore, no one DESERVES to be stolen from.

    1. Re:blame the victims by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      It's for the courts to decide whether you're competent to stand trial, at least in the US. Being charged is not the same as being convicted. Intent is also a factor in crimes in the US. Being stupid is often a possible defense if you can get a jury to believe it was stupidity and not willing participation in the crime. Some people would be too embarrassed to admit being duped, but that's their problem. Insanity or lack of intelligence is not generally a pass from being brought before a hearing.

  64. Be careful! Some scams are not as obvious. by suck_burners_rice · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I do NOT think that scam VICTIMS need to be jailed, whether they are greedy or not.

    Yes, you'd have to be a total numbskull to believe some of the stories that scammers use. But if you read the next paragraph, you'll see that even someone who isn't "stupid" can be fooled. Ridiculous and obvious scams come with stories that your uncle's long-lost twin (separated at birth) who lived in Zimbabwe and ran a diamond mine just died in a tragic car accident and you were the only beneficiary in his will, please email over your bank account number and routing info, or that Nigeria's silicon tycoon needs to transfer a billion dollars to a company in the United States but due to some extremely complicated circumstances related to a jacked up political climate, they need to park the funds in the bank account of someone who is trustworthy and you came highly recommended, and they'll leave you 1% of the money as a fee for your troubles (that comes out to ten million bucks), please email us your bank account number, routing info, a photocopy of your driver license and passport, etc., etc., etc., well, all I can say is that if you actually believe any of this shit, you need to be educated. Read about the so-called 419 Scam among others. Yes, you'd have to be "greedy" to fall for such a scam. Should you be jailed? No. You're still the victim of a crime.

    Some scams sound more realistic than the ones above. For example, I once received an email bearing a friend's email address as the "From:" address and claiming that he had lost his passport and/or wallet while on vacation in Africa, and due to complications with the local authorities, he needed to borrow $1000 to pay some fine and get out of jail (money which he would supposedly pay back upon returning home). I called my friend on the phone and it turned out that he was safe and sound here at home, not in Africa. Someone had jacked his email password or otherwise hacked into his email account. Apparently, everyone in his address book received such an email. This is the type of scam that even discerning people could fall for. You have to be really, really, really careful not to fall for some of this stuff.

    --
    McCain/Palin '08. Now THAT's hope and change!
    1. Re:Be careful! Some scams are not as obvious. by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      How is this insightful ?
      You have to be really really really careful not to believe that someone you call on the phone isn't in Africa ? Do us all a favour. I get scam emails that appear to come from my own email address - good job I've got a brain otherwise I would send off the cash today !
      Number 1 rule - when something unsolicited is regarding money, then there is something fishy going on. Especially if you haven't ordered any goods, made any transactions, or offered any assistance. Never in the whole time I've been on the net have I ever received an email offering me money, from anybody I normally deal with, whether that be a bank, a friend, or an employer.
      Sorry, if you send money to a foreign country on the basis of a poorly worded email, then you deserve everything you get. (or not get).
      BTW, stupid is as stupid does. So saying you don't have to be stupid to get fooled is oxymoronic. This isn't the highest level of magic, where you have no idea how something's done. They are asking for money, and only a fool does what they are asked without considering the possible outcomes.
      Everybody does something stupid at one time or another, but if you have any sense at all, you don't get fooled again. You learn. And what you learn can be applied in many other areas of your life. Congenitally stupid people never learn. Blame it on the levis.

    2. Re:Be careful! Some scams are not as obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These scams are nothing but old school long cons adapted to the internet.

      The hook is always the promise of some money, and what protects the con
      is the belief that this is some back room hush hush stuff going on, so
      authorities can never get involved. In a real life long con, there may be
      a faked murder or bust that the mark can run away from, but would
      then be afraid to go to the police. Thats a proper blow off.

      It may be a little harder to snare victims, hence the carpet bombing approach,
      but the blow off has never been easier.

      The cons are viral though, and mutate constantly. The other day someone contacted
      me on instant messenger claiming to be a Texan businesswoman abroad in Nigeria.
      Her occupation? Banker. I took the hook first to see what would come next, and "she"
      claimed that she had discovered 11 million dollars in a dormant account. You all know
      what comes next.

      Except I blew her off and sent url for the wikipedia entry for Advance-Fee fraud
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_fee_fraud
      .

    3. Re:Be careful! Some scams are not as obvious. by suck_burners_rice · · Score: 1

      I think you misread what I wrote. The email appeared as if it was from my friend. Because it sounded fishy, I called him to find out what the hell is going on. He was safe and sound at home, not in jail in Africa and in need of assistance like the email claimed. In other words, yes, I should believe that someone I call on the phone is not in Africa, when his not being in Africa means that he's not asking for money. Would I have sent money if I believed that he was in Africa? Hell no! I would have contacted the authorities.

      --
      McCain/Palin '08. Now THAT's hope and change!
    4. Re:Be careful! Some scams are not as obvious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone had jacked his email password or otherwise hacked into his email account.

      Hacked! Yeah, that's it! my email account was hacked! *shifty eyes*

  65. EXACTLY! by raehl · · Score: 1

    And money laundering is money laundering.

    Were the scam 'real', the 'victim' would be guilty of multiple felonies.

    That's the only REAL difference here. If you ACTUALLY helped wire a few million out of an African country, you'd be a criminal. But if you fall for someone else PRETENDING that you're helping wire said money, then you're a victim.

    A few thousand dollars lost to a scam is a small price to pay when the alternative is that it's NOT a scam and you get to spend a few years in prison instead.

    1. Re:EXACTLY! by kraut · · Score: 1

      >f you ACTUALLY helped wire a few million out of an African country, you'd be a criminal.

      No, you'd be a swiss banker.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    2. Re:EXACTLY! by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      I find it very funny that your username is "kraut" and you say that hiding (probably illicit) funds from war-torn countries is the job of Swiss bankers.

  66. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Talkischeap · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Apparently you spend too much time in your mommas basement playing fragging games, to notice that the former USA has been pretty much a proto fascist state for some time now.

    I didn't happen to have a flag that I could hang upside down to show the distress my country is in.

    Therefore, my "incorrect" spelling.

    I'll bet you feel real superior insulting people for their speling mistakes, what a "man" you must be!

    You don't have a clue about the US educational system, idiot troll.

    And YES!, racist bastards piss me off!

    How come you tolerate them?

    Perhaps you are one of them, eh?

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  67. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I don't see what it has to do with being poor. Some of our richest and most well known public figures are unashamed bogans.

    Examples: Shane Warne (cricketer), Lleyton Hewitt (tennis player), etc, etc.

    note: Steve Irwin. Bushman. Not a bogan. Crikey.

    --
    http://www.xkcd.com/354/
  68. It is NOT a crime! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who said that bribery of Nigerian gov/person in Nigeria is a crime under Australian law? Australia doesn't have signed extradition agreement with Nigeria!
    However, that also means that Nigerians can legally rob Australians (I don't think those doing that care, anyway).

  69. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

    Apparently you don't have a handle on the Australian slang word "bogan", because it appears to me that it refers to the working poor.

    "Bogan From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogan The term bogan (pronounced /bogn/, rhyming with slogan) is Australian and New Zealand English slang, usually pejorative, for a person who is, or is perceived to be, of a lower-class background. According to the stereotype, the speech and mannerisms of "bogans" indicate, poor education, cheap clothing and uncultured upbringing. 'Bogans' usually reside in economically disadvantaged suburbs (often outer metropolitan) or rural areas[1]."

    I believe it's the part about "economically disadvantaged", i.e. "poor", that may explain it for you.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  70. Help! Help! by Bragador · · Score: 1

    Someone is using logic on Slashdot!

  71. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Talkischeap · · Score: 0, Troll

    "You're both emotional as hell."

    So glad that you noticed...

    Racism should never be tolerated it's total bullshit espoused only by the most ignorant of idiots to ever walk this earth.

    And it's ever so easy for a "strong willed" individual to lead those idiots to do their cowardly bidding.

    If YOU don't stand up to racism, then you are a tacit racist!

    Just look to WW2 Germany for an extreme example of "saying nothing" against racism/fascism.

    I could give a crap about your fucking "statics", that's a canard to cloud the real issue of fighting racism as it happens.

    I my town, whites commit 90% of the rapes, so using "statics", in my town whites are bad?

    Statics can't justify racism, no matter how many you throw at us.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  72. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Sorry, mate.. I happen to live here. Note the use of the word 'our' in my previous post. Turns out that there's this process of euphemism and dysphemism.

    Btw: it's hard to tell in this thread, but i'm not trying to antagonize. Australia's cultural position is really interesting. Our 'culture' issues are, in some ways, on the same level as our 'race' issues, with the caveat that it's sometimes unclear which cultural group an individual identifies with.

    While the term Bogan may have once been used in the way you describe, it's certainly not accurate now. It refers far more strongly to a set of beliefs and behaviors than a distinct social group.

    --
    http://www.xkcd.com/354/
  73. Warm lager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee, I would have fallen for this except for the warm lager. You must be thinking of the British!

  74. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Talkischeap · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I apologize for being so strident when I'm "hot".

    So how about being a good sport and "adjusting" the wiki to reflect that, so's us ignorant americans can understand better?

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  75. It's not always greed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes they have really good sob stories and want your help to open an orphanage or whatever. It's definitely always stupidity, but not always greed.

  76. Re: the flamebait jackpot by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's not like the parent article is real important, same old boring /. jokes, yawn.

    Calling out racism is way more fun!

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  77. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's a difficult set of characteristics to cleanly define, unfortunately.. I'll do what i can when i have the time to do it properly, since i expect that it'll be debated at least as much as it has been here.

    --
    http://www.xkcd.com/354/
  78. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by ttfkam · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    As I am multiracial, I guess being a racist would also require that I be self-loathing.

    For the record, I don't tolerate them; however, until Slashdot sees fit to actually do something about the all-too-common and overt racist, sexist, homophobic, fascist, and religiously dogmatic comments present in every batch of comments, I see no reason to give them a greater audience by engaging them.

    The one thing you don't do with a troll is tell them they're wrong. It only encourages them to be more wrong.

    --

    - I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
  79. Agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree completely. It's clear that most if not all of these scam letters ask to participate in a crime. Typically stealing money from the UN or other organization. Taking part makes anyone a member of the criminal gang and they should go to jail.

  80. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

    "I'm not misusing statistics, like your counter-example is."

    While I'll agree that my counter example was totally weak, I now feel the need to point out your incongruities as well.

    You show us the example: "White on black rapes are often in the single digits, per year.".

    Which proves what?

    It's a statistic all by itself, and can be use any way one wants, it proves nothing.

    Why don't you provide the statistics that show how many white men date black women, I'll betcha it reflects your "statistic" (i.e. not many) because white men don't date black women as a general rule, so rapes will follow that curve as well.

    Hey, I'm kinda liking this statistic thingy.

    Oh, so when looking deeper, that makes your argument a straw man as well.

    Touche.

    I'll be back to spar with you after I finish washing my dinner dishes.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  81. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    If I might intercede in this flamefest to say that (I'm Australian), I think the wikipedia article is wrong - it may have started out that way but Bogan these days refers to a lifestyle rather than to a economic class.

    --
    Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
  82. Re: Rape "statistics" by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

    "If whites in your town commit 90% of the rapes, and they're 90% of the population, it's to be expected. If whites in your town commit 90% of the rapes and they're less than half of the population, it's a sign that something is seriously fucked up. I'd say that the whites in this hypothetical town need to figure out why their youth has such a tendency towards rape."

    There ya go jumping to conclusions that aren't reflected in the real world.

    My town has 7,500 people in it, and has roughly a rape every two months, what do your statistics say about that?

    Is my town "seriously fucked up", like you say?

    Did you even check the statistics before you judged mine?

    Uh, no.

    I don't understand you, first you tout statistics, then you make broad sweeping judgments about my town without first checking the statistics of the incidence of rape in towns before you judged mine?

    Tell you what, you can dis my town after you find the statistics that prove it.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  83. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by stainlesssteelpat · · Score: 1
    It's not financial, it's geographical. You really trust wikipedia as a source? Bob hawke, Prime Minister in the 80's he was a bogan, wealthy and a Rhodes Scholar also has the world record for doing a yard glass.

    Pull you head in mate.

    --
    War is the statesman's game, the priest's delight, the lawyer's jest, the hired assassin's trade.- Shelley
  84. Re: Eating my hat now.... by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

    Awww, crap, I missed your italics...

    No excuse, I'm lame sometimes.

    I have no umbrage with you, I apologize.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  85. Re: Racist Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    To do nothing about overt racism under the guise of apathy, makes you a tacit racist.

    It's not the nanny states job to stop racism or Slash Dot's, it's yours, and mine, and everybody's who cares about humanity.

    Quick, while a few are still alive, find a WW2 concentration camp survivor, talk to them about what it was like before Hitler came to power, they acted just like you.

  86. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Pantero+Blanco · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why don't you provide the statistics that show how many white men date black women, I'll betcha it reflects your "statistic" (i.e. not many) because white men don't date black women as a general rule, so rapes will follow that curve as well.

    If rapes followed that curve, there were still be a lot more than TEN of them per year.

    Oh, so when looking deeper, that makes your argument a straw man as well.

    Nope, see above. And if it did, it would only be one point out of several. The points dealing with other crimes, and with rape in general, would still stand.

    The black crime rate is definitely higher. The real debate should be about why, but that can't happen until enough people admit the former. The few who do admit it generally want to blame it on the income gap or a revenge motive (which I shot down in my first post). Others try to avoid talking about whenever they can because "it helps the racists"

    It's past 2 AM where I am. If you want to continue tomorrow through email or some IM system, let me know.

  87. Better idea... by Arimus · · Score: 1

    Instead of jailing marks who fall for this crap howabout a system which reviews the trap they fell into if it comes under the heading of "Only an idiot" would fall for this then the next time they touch a computer 20KVa gets whacked down the line to them and the same to the orginator of the spam.

    Result: One less idiot, one less spammer. Average IQ of world goes up :)

    (And same goes for people who respond to the I am your bank and have lost all your details please tell me them again emails - if they've lost all the details how do they know to email you ;> )

    --
    --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
  88. Re: Racist Trolls by ttfkam · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    They hung out on web discussion forums and said, "Don't feed the trolls?"

    Seriously?

    You think that replying to Slashdot trolls is being proactive in this world with regard to racism?

    Seriously?

    We're in worse shape than I thought.

    --

    - I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
  89. Re: Racist Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We're in worse shape than I thought."

    Apparently you're too well entertained to notice.

  90. That's stylish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So because they can't be asked to put some laws and enforcement in place to catch criminals in a decent fashion (i.e. the model the UK is also heading for) they recommend jailing the victims instead. Well, yes, they're easier to find I guess.

    Well, it gives you at least an idea WHY the problem persists. Which such noobs at the helm there isn't any chance of improvement soon.

  91. Actually I partly agree. by jskline · · Score: 1

    The problem is that putting the victim in jail also causes problems for freedoms and can have wide reaching affects to other parts of the law.

    Face it. The victim is someone who is; "a fool and his money are soon parted".

    That should be enough. He ain't gonna get it back once it leaves the country.

    --
    All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
  92. they arent victims, they're conspirators by CdBee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The fact still stands that any simple moral analysis of the state of the 'victims' showed that they conspired to defraud either a sovereign state or certain inhabitants of one - and lost out as a result.

    Honesty in these cases would have saved them their losses

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  93. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You really trust wikipedia as a source?"

    Mmm, lets see now...

    I'm wrong for not knowing what a local Australian slang word means.

    I'm wrong for not looking it up promptly on Google.

    Now I'm wrong because I looked it up, and the most definitive thing I could find is on the wiki.

    And according to you, it's incorrect?

    Well, fix it then, or Piss off, because to take umbrage with someone who doesn't have all the facts makes you look stupid.

  94. they are sometimes about criminal activity by someone1234 · · Score: 1

    Yes, i saw letters which were about smuggling money out of Nigeria, and some which were about literally laundering money which came from a botched bank robbery.
    People who fell for these DESERVE the punishment.
    If those cases were real and they caught, they would sit in prison.

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  95. So much focus on Advanced Feed Fraud by the Media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about

    LOTTERY SCAMS
    INTERNET AUCTION FRAUD
    PHISHING AND PHARMING FOR IDENTITY THEFT
    PASSIVE RESIDUAL INCOME" SCAMS
    CHECK (COUNTERFEIT) FRAUDS
    WORK-AT-HOME SCAMS

    Advanced fee fraud scams are miniscule (2.2%) in comparison to other forms of fraud online.

    More people are getting ripped off on ebay/craigslist in a week, than a year via 419.

    The bulk of internet fraud comes from our backyard. 2 countries represent 75% of all internet fraud

    United States: 60.9 percent
    United Kingdom: 15.9 percent

    I would rather get an email from nigeria, atleast i can avoid those, than have my bank account/identity taken by the latest phishing scheme by someone from the us/uk/china/Romania etc..

  96. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by Gordonjcp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I didn't happen to have a flag that I could hang upside down to show the distress my country is in.

    Would that work with the Stars and Stripes? It works with the Union Jack because the St Patrick's Cross segments are offset a little, so flying it upside down makes only a subtle change, sending a covert distress message. I think either the American flag or Australian flag would be too obvious if flown upside down.

  97. Think of it in terms of the money volume by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The legitimate companies in Nigeria aren't a big proportion of the populace but do most (even if you include the scam "income") of the international money transactions.

    Which you want to disrupt.

    1. Re:Think of it in terms of the money volume by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      It would be fairly easy to put a policy in place that says actual human contact with the bank's customer must take place only for the first transfer to Nigeria. This would have minimal disruption while still preventing these scams.

      In fact, I think this policy is a good idea for any transaction that falls greatly outside the normal patterns of a bank account. If I suddenly arrange for a large transfer of money from my checking account to some place in Uzbekistan, just for example, then I really think I should be getting a phone call from my bank asking if I really meant to do that before it goes through.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    2. Re:Think of it in terms of the money volume by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      brilliant
      (needs to be tagged with "suddenoutbreakofcommonsense")

  98. good point by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    The forms of the scams I have seen are asking you to help transfer funds of a deceased person by pretending to be their heir. It is a blatantly dishonest thing to do. So at least for that form of the scam, I have zero sympathy for the people who lose thousands of dollars.

    On the other hand these scams might make up a significant percentage of Nigeria's GDP, so the position that government officials have on the issue is suspect.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  99. Oh, yes you can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's just that there are more dishonest people and they are less likely to go to the police with righteous indignation and a complaint.

  100. Yeah, unbelievable, but still a damned good idea by DrHyde · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's unbelievable that a Nigerian government official would deign to notice the problem.

    But it's a damned good idea, because the victims who volunteer to help, for example, supposed bank employees embezzle funds are themselves attempting to commit fraud. Which is a crime. For which they should be punished.

  101. Jogging ain't illegal, wire-fraud is by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is the nigerian scam we are talking about, the grand-daddy of them all AND the scam would involve the "victim" commiting fraud. This is illegal.

    Let me try this on you.

    Say a drug dealer sell you 1 kg of cocaine. Are you then a criminal and deserve to go to jail?

    Now say that drug dealer is a scammer and sells you a bag of baking powder instead. You however think it is cocaine, would you go to jail for this?

    Probably not, because it is NOT a crime to buy baking powder for an insane price. Morally? Maybe, after all, you thought you were dealing in drugs.

    But with the nigerian scam you tend to actually have to attempt to commit a crime, fraud to get it all going.

    Do you think people who buy "cheap" goods that are obviously stolen should be done for receiving?

    The nigerian guy is just upset that this scam is giving his country a bad rep when the victims are hardly victims but instead people who in their greed were ready to defraud the nigerian goverment. Let us not forget what the scam is, these "victims" were ready to steal millions from a 3rd world nation.

    Not everyone who falls for a scam deserves sympathy.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  102. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by nosfucious · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Agreed.

    When I think Bogan, I'm thinking packet of Winnie blue up the sleeve of a too tight black t-shit. Obligatory moccies, stonewash blue jeans, mullet, dream car is the SLR5000 Torana (or later day Ford Falcon V8 ute), hails from Narre Warren/Cranbourne, all the "Special" subjects at high school and knows the lyrics to all the AC/DC songs ever written, but probably not the National Anthem. And for what they will be condemned to the 9th level of hell for all eternity: Collingwood supporter.

    --
    Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
  103. That's smart... Not !!! by mariuszbi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Newsflash... Greedy man enters Nigerian scam, looses money. If he thinks he will be charged with something leading to imprisonment, he will _never_ go to the Police reporting the scam. No crime here move along! Guess the scammers will be happy!

  104. Could be reformulated more precisely by hey! · · Score: 1

    e.g. the length of time a victim retains his money is inversely proportional to his foolishness.

    Everybody is at least a little foolish, some of the time. It follows that everybody will be scammed, sooner or later. Sooner if you are credulous and naive, later if you are skeptical and well informed.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  105. Re: Rape "statistics" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My town has 7,500 people in it, and has roughly a rape every two months, what do your statistics say about that?

    Is my town "seriously fucked up", like you say?

    Yes... it REALLY is, and no statistics are necessary... 7500 people, with a rape every 2 months? That's very very scary.

  106. ah, thought crime, what an excellent idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have faith that if I pray hard to God then Bill Gates will keel over and die.

    I'm not committing any crime, I'm not even doing anything that will lead to any crime, but I believe I might be facilitating one, so that must be at least mans-laughter or something, amirite you fascist cunt?

  107. What the hell? by Thyrteen · · Score: 1

    This guy sounds like a crook himself! Oh, we shouldn't do anything about it! You guys shouldn't fall for it! This is the typical sort of response you'd expect from the criminals after being caught. Throw this guy in jail, please!

  108. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by ozphx · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing its like the US health system. Guess you couldn't afford an education?

    You should come here, we look after our citizens with free education all the way through tertiary, free health care and government paid unemployment benefits. We also look after our migrants and minorities.

    We also let the lower-class countries do most of the fighting for us. So, ya know, keep up the good work in the middle east.

    --
    3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
  109. Actually, their economic power lets them by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

    BUY political power.

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  110. You can't cure stupid... by RaigetheFury · · Score: 3, Insightful

    but you CAN give it a direction. I've said this a thousand times. There will always be people stupid/desperate/greedy enough to do something like this. Hell, two good friends of mine who I always thought were very intelligent fell victim to an Amway like scam. (Same company different name).

    When I showed them all of the websites talking about the scam they realized what a big mistake was. At least they only lost $400. Most people who fall for this lose their life savings.

    My mother is internet stupid. She's not a dumb person this is just alien to her. I showed her the power of google to answer her questions and now she uses it all the time to research businesses that she wants to work with. In fact, I think google helped her become Internet savvy.

    I truly believe that people who fall for scams like this should be forced to serve time. Give them solid time to think about their actions and how society should be forced to help the Darwin award winners of today.

    1. Re:You can't cure stupid... by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      [T]wo good friends of mine who I always thought were very intelligent fell victim to an Amway like scam [. . .] I truly believe that people who fall for scams like this should be forced to serve time.

      Remind me never to be friends with you.

  111. Not always.. by RichiH · · Score: 1

    How does this help with the masses of people who try to rip you off with fake ebay accounts, etc? I know what you mean & I agree. But your way is not 100% secure.

    1. Re:Not always.. by jacquesm · · Score: 1

      that's a problem that's inherent in ebay, they basically allow people to list stuff for sale without verifying the seller actually exists.

      For low value items that's not a big deal but if a seller is relatively new and you spend a lot of $ on the first transaction you know you're taking a risk.

      I personally don't mind using ebay (and it's dutch cousin marktplaats) but as a rule if the seller is reasonably new then I go and pick it up or I buy it elsewhere.

      Haven't been scammed yet... and I met some pretty neat people like that.

    2. Re:Not always.. by RichiH · · Score: 1

      I meant when a buyer gets foo from you and the money you get is from phished accounts, etc. Had that happen to a friend of mine. Cell phones seem to be very desirable to those scammers.

  112. Re:Typical Nigger Response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucking Nigger always blame other people for their problem.

    WOW, they are just like everybody else.

  113. Temptation. by chris_sawtell · · Score: 1

    "... and lead us not into temptation" has the corollary "Thou shalt not tempt". In the Nigerian and Australian cases under discussion, I suppose it is somewhat debatable who is tempting whom.

  114. Wonderful wind ups by JerryQ · · Score: 3, Funny

    go to http://www.sweetchillisauce.com/ this guy winds up the scammers all the way in, hilarious stuff. If more people did this, now that would slow the scammers! Jerry

  115. Its easy to kill nigeriam scam: by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

    Simply disable western union, paypal and wire money transfer to Nigeria, "cut" then off from online or untraceable money transfer.

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    1. Re:Its easy to kill nigeriam scam: by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      All it takes is a cohort in another country to pickup the wire transfer.

      Another solution is positive spam - if they got enough responses, many of which are fake the time they take to read and reply would cut down their take. Alternatively, hey may just skip real responses so you wold help potential victims as well.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    2. Re:Its easy to kill nigeriam scam: by cheros · · Score: 1

      Have a browse through Ross Anderson's papers (sorry, no time to look it up). In a paper "The economics of fraud" or something he goes through the arguments. Blocking or limiting "non-bank" transfers is only a part solution.

      These scammers also employ "mules" - people that allow their bank account to be used for transfers. That means they get a good cut as long as it lasts, but as soon as the police arrives the party is over, and the criminals are clever enough to remain untraceable. The mule invariably takes the hit and ends up in jail.

      So, correct in that non-bank blocking would solve a degree of the problem, but it's not a total fix..

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
    3. Re:Its easy to kill nigeriam scam: by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Law enforcement isn't all that hep on even tracking down the mules. I'd be happier if the network got "rolled up" as soon as discovered. This would (a) limit the losses to some extent and (b) make it pretty clear to prospective mules that this is not a money-making opportunity.

      I just recently got a fake check and the general attitude was that it wasn't a priority because I didn't lose any money. Not sure what they would have done had the scam run to a successful conclusion, because it wouldn't be any more tracible then either.

    4. Re:Its easy to kill nigeriam scam: by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why anonymous, untracable money transfer is needed, for anyone anywhere. When such things are easily stolen because they are anonymous and untracable.

      If you wanted to send money to a relative or friend would it be a problem if it was indeed tracable and only for a particular person with a confirmed identity?

      OK, if you wanted to send money to an overseas blackmailer that was holding your web site hostage you might want the money to be untracable. But why do we need to foster criminal enterprises?

    5. Re:Its easy to kill nigeriam scam: by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      I have another solution and this is a total fix. A thermonuclear total fix :)

      Hahaha, just kidding. But disable the untraceable payment methods helps a lot (the scammer will need a real - and traceable - bank account). Well, in any case, we aways have the thermonuclear option.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  116. Dumb people loose freedom for rest by MazzThePianoman · · Score: 1

    I agree. Stupidity is tolerated too much nowadays and now we have to have warnings that coffee is hot, winter is cold, and not to fold up the baby carriage with the child still inside. A little natural section can be good thing especially in a democratic society who is letting themselves be taken advantage of. However getting ripped off and humiliated by these scam artists is punishment enough . . . at least for now.

    --
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" Franklin
  117. Putting people in jail is rarely the answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People would need to know that the law exists and that there's a penalty for it for there to be a deterrent effect.

    As these people don't even seem to be aware that these are scams, and therefore aren't hearing stories about people getting sucked in by these scams, I kinda doubt they're going to hear stories about people getting thrown in jail over them either.

  118. what we actually have: by toby · · Score: 1

    Greedy people with economic (and other) power...

    --
    you had me at #!
  119. Nigerian minister says "Don't trust Nigerians!" by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    Because a great way to encourage potential investors in your country is to chastise people for being gullible enough to trust your country.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  120. Illegal websites by phorm · · Score: 1

    Actually, that raises a good point. I wonder how many sites there are peddling illegal or borderline goods that don't delivery?

    For example, I remember a joke (on a TV show or something) about billing a person for fetish items under "gentlemen's club inc" and then upon receiving complains, refunding them via a cheque from "men's assvibrators inc" or something of the like, on the premise that not everyone would be willing to walk into a bank and cash a cheque from that name.

    Now, given the number of spams I've seen that advertise products that aren't only illegal to sell, but often to purchase (illegal pr0n etc), how many would be stupid enough to buy them, but wouldn't exactly be in a position to complain that "Illicit goods X" weren't properly delivered?

    1. Re:Illegal websites by jcgf · · Score: 1

      I'd be perfectly willing to cash a cheque that was from them. I would have a problem with writing cheques to them. In the former case, I can just say that I wrote some code for their finance department or some such. If I'm sending them a cheque, it's a little bit more difficult to explain.

  121. Re:Honest people are easy to scam. Just not this s by turing_m · · Score: 1

    Scamming honest people makes for poor movies...It's too easy.

    If it's so easy, why doesn't everyone own ILM?

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  122. Dearest Readers of SlashDot by goffster · · Score: 1

    Cowboy Neal died and left you all of his money in the sum of $26,000,000 USD. Simply reply and you will get your due!

  123. Re:Typical Nigger Response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm really disappointed at how successful this troll post was. So simple, and yet it garnered nearly 40 replies at the time I posted this.

  124. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    It won't happen. They seem to want to compete with /b/ for that audience.

  125. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    Obvious is the point. It's part of the traditional rules for flying the flag that flying it or hanging it upside down is a distress signal. We probably got that tradition from your country, after all.

    That it's obvious rather than discreet (not really completely covert if it's hanging there for all to see) means it can signal farther away but that enemies of the state might notice it more quickly as well. It's a trade off.

    If all you have left for signaling is a flag rather than an encrypted radio, clear signal radio, flare, spray paint, air horn, or signal mirror then you're probably needing help pretty quickly. You'll use the flag you have, even if it's not ideal for your situation. Using a GB flag in that way might get an American soldier's attention, but probably not an American civilian's. An American is much more likely to be carrying an American flag than the Union Jack, anyway.

    So yeah, if discretion is called for then you're lucky to be a Brit. If a clear signal from farther away is called for, then the US or Australian flags work better. Russia and Germany would be in the same boat as the US if they use the same symbol (do they? how universal is this?). If you're French or Italian I guess you find a different way to signal distress.

  126. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    Yes, you're wrong. They're not being ignorant bigots on the basis of skin color and ethnicity. They're being ignorant bigots on the basis of nationality and class standing and thinking it makes them better than other ignorant bigots.

    Let them have their superiority complex. You're just helping them flood the thread. It's like trying to have a reasonable discussion with the Ku Klux Klan about a dark-skinned Catholic who is ethnically half Jewish. They have their point of view about the people they hate and you're not going to change it.

  127. The government by EvilIntelligence · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The biggest problem here is the Nigerian government. They are well aware that the 409 scams bring in millions of dollars a year into their economy, and is probably one of their biggest revenue streams for the country. Since they have little else to offer the world, they are not about to stop the money flow

  128. Matter of fact, I got it now: by toby · · Score: 2, Informative

    VB is truly shit - I mean piss. You're better off with a Coopers for sure.

    --
    you had me at #!
  129. I know an Australian who barbecues them... by toby · · Score: 1

    But he was born in Spain, and actually knows how to cook.

    --
    you had me at #!
  130. fresh from cellar by toby · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the perfect temperature for Guinness/stout.

    --
    you had me at #!
  131. the commissionaire may be a scammer by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Or have close relatives that do. Nearly everyone there is involved in some nefarious activity.

  132. poor things by toby · · Score: 1

    They're most likely already victims of Microsoft (the corporate criminal class).

    --
    you had me at #!
  133. Taking Some Comfort... by flyneye · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well,I guess it's a strange sense of relief to realize that gov't. officials everywhere are microcephalic retards and it's not just limited to
    the U.S. Republicrats. It's also interesting to note that from my only information about Nigerians(the scammers,the diplomat,warnings from health officials,news of muslim activities,etc.)that Nigeria is one big Darwin Award just waiting to happen.I would hope that isn't really so,but it re-enforces the idea that immigration control is a very good thing.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  134. Ain't it funny... by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

    ... that some people regularly say "dumb" or "stupid" people get what they deserve, but they never mention anything about callous a-holes. Weird.

    --
    You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
  135. corruption by toby · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    In the USA it's called Lobbying, or "Government Relations".

    --
    you had me at #!
  136. I think it's a good idea by pem · · Score: 1

    Lock 'em up for their own safety, since they're obviously too dumb to live in the modern world unassisted.

  137. re-victimizing the victims by drew30319 · · Score: 1

    Wow. Really?

    You don't have a family member or friend that would/could fall for this? You don't know an 80+ year old that, new to all-things-Internet, may fall for a con?

    Your statement, and that of the Nigerian "High Commissioner," are unfortunately typical of what happens often in society, we re-victimize the victim.

    Just because somebody exhibits naivete or guilelessness does that make them fair game for cons?

    Or if they wear a short skirt, responsible for their own rape?

    Or "they should know better than to hike alone" so they're complicit in their own murder?

    Though there's an obvious difference between the severity of these cases, the rationale is the same, and to me frankly is repugnant.

    Crime victims have enough to contend with already.

    --
    JAGga.me ----> Producing video games addressing emotional health and wellness issues affecting teens.
  138. Yes, I'm blaming the victims by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

    > If you're so dumb, you DESERVE to be ripped off.

    We must make stupidity more painful.

    I know that goes against everything the Democrats who run the government schools who trained you shoveled into your young skull full of mush, but it's the only way... for them and us. Understanding the wisdom in that one line will set you on the road to freeing your mind so please turn off the computer for a few minutes, put whatever music you do your best thinking to on the iPod and ponder it a few meinutes.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  139. Re:Typical Nigger Response by siphonophore · · Score: 1

    As much as this this guy is a useless troll, i do love the fact that Slashdot loves free speech enough to let him be.

    --
    Dance like you're hurt, Love like you need money, and work when somebody's watching.
    -Scott Adams
  140. you're right by toby · · Score: 1

    Not while that "special relationship" with the USA exists (massive CIA bases on Australian soil, etc, etc).

    --
    you had me at #!
  141. facilitating?? by toby · · Score: 1

    Why is Bill Gates dying "a crime"? If it happened right now, it would be about 30 years too late to do much good, but it's an inevitability, so I think you can relax, Mr A.C. When it happens, nobody's gonna come track you down.

    --
    you had me at #!
  142. Federal Rules of Evidence, rule 404 by GradiusCVK · · Score: 1
    Haha, yes I too love my oldest friend and teacher, TV. In all seriousness though, I believe what you said is actually true to some extent, in that the evidence is basically the same as character witnesses (like if your best friend testifies that you've been a great guy all your life and never seemed like the kind of person who would do such a thing). Pretty weak, legally speaking, but effective at swaying a jury. However, there are very specific rules related to how, why, and under what circumstances it can be admitted. See here. Note the list of exceptions for which criminal history can be presented:

    proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident Not nearly as all-encompassing as it appears. Generally speaking, it can be submitted as evidence that you either
    -Are experienced in performing said crime, you knew what you were doing, so it wasn't all just a crazy accident, and it wasn't a one-time heat of the moment thing, but rather a planned action (opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowlede, absense of mistake or accident)
    -Are the person the prosecution says you are (eg John Doe, born 01/01/1970) (identity)
    So basically, it doesn't help to prove that you did it at all... all it does is help to remove some specific affirmative defenses you might use. In other words, if it's well proven with other evidence that you murdered your wife, then evidence that you have murdered your last 5 wives may be admitted to eliminate your heat of passion defense.

  143. Get rid of the real problem by Bubbahyde · · Score: 1

    Nigeria. President Bush, theres undisclosed wmd there and not to mention lots of sweet oil. Okay thats taken care of. Lol! just kidding...

  144. Re:Typical Nigger Response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck that shit yo. Tyrone and da crew are gonna be rollin up to ya nice white house in the suburbs around 8pm. We gonna take turns getting into your sweet sweet ass. Big Al can't wait for shower time to begin. Bring your tears honky.

  145. Tax on the stupid is not a stupid tax by ancientt · · Score: 1

    Clarification: "A stupid tax" is a phrase that is likely going to be expected to mean the same thing as "A tax which is ill advised." I deliberately chose the wording of "tax stupidity" because it is clear. EvanED is also clear, but missing the entire point.

    Those who spend a dollar a week, or even five dollars a week, are not playing the lottery in a stupid fashion, nor are they the major contributors the the hosting state's income. It is the people I have seen buying tickets in significant numbers and the people sure that they "usually beat the odds" and the people who feel they are due who are playing in a stupid fashion. Those who purchase large numbers of tickets generally do so, not because it significantly increases their entertainment value, but because they believe they will have a better shot of winning. (They do not understand the actual numbers involved.) The people who "usually beat the odds" are the ones who forget the losses they incur over time. Those who feel they are due do not understand how statistics work nor for that matter really understand that the universe does not in fact revolve around them. These are the stupid who play the lotteries, and in a stupid fashion.

    State funded lotteries do some good, in my state for example, most of the revenue goes into the "general fund" of which around 80% goes to the cost of state funded education. Most states actually use the income in their budgets which in turn saves them from having to raise revenue through additional or higher taxes. The income generated has essentially the same use as would traditional tax revenue, and since it comes mostly from stupid people, it is fair to call it a tax on the stupid.

    The effect on society is one of segregating wealth on an index of intelligence. Is it good that stupidity should be punished? Certainly there is some merit in encouraging people to make good decisions, but at the same time, many people are not intelligent and seem to be unable to make wise decisions, not through their own lack of effort alone, but also because of their environment and because of their physical limitations. It is, in short, harder for some people to learn than others which is really a physical handicap rather than the choice usually assumed.

    What society really benefits from is productive and self sufficient citizens, regardless of intellectual prowess. If you really want to see improvements in state income, find a way to tax the lazy for laziness (which is a choice and which is also rewarded once significant levels of dedication are reached.)

    --
    B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
  146. He's in on it.... by rtechie · · Score: 1

    That's what this is about. These scams are a significant part of the revenue for Nigeria and he's probably in on them. Nowadays, most of the scams aren't from people "ripping off the government" as claimed, but fake "mail-order bride" or "help me feed my starving children" claims.

    These claims are beyond disingenuous. He's right is saying it's only a handful of people running theses scams. That's because they KNOW WHO THESE PEOPLE ARE. They're as recognizable in Nigeria as Al Capone was in Chicago. The authorities don't do anything to them because they ARE the authorities.

    The proper response is to either:

    A) Have the foreign office threaten Nigeria with sanctions if they don't enforce the laws and extradite scammers to Australia.

    B) If Nigeria is unwilling to do A, send kidnappers to Nigeria to simply seize the criminals and take them back to Australia and/or shoot them on the spot.

  147. in theory, it could work very well by r00t · · Score: 1

    Human stupidity can be fixed. Simple:

    Kill adults who can not read. Kill adults who
    can not do basic math.

    Prohibit birth control. Require all fertile adults
    to report for sperm donation or insemination if
    they go 3 years without a birth.

    From age 5 to 12, test kids several times a year.
    Those who are bottom-ranked for several tests in
    a row get executed. You set the bar such that the
    total cull is well above 50%.

    Average family: 8 to 16 kids born, 2 to 4 survive

  148. Re:Fucking Coward! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, and you AC are a racist baiter, but it doesn't work with me nigger

    Well, it seems to have worked thus far

  149. RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm all confused. When you say, "RTFA" does that mean, "Read The Featured Acticle?" Mayhap, "Realize The Futility of Acticulation?" Is it, "Render the Fat Albatross" Or, "Request that flatulences abound?"

    Real thinkerds flay albinos

  150. Re:Typical White Trash Asshole Response by stainlesssteelpat · · Score: 1

    Another point worthy of note is, Bogans are proud to be bogans. Go rent The Castle. Australians myself included tend to be proud of our anti-heroes, we turned Ned Kelly and Chopper into heros, and we tend to idolize the Larrikin as part of our humour and national identity. Sometimes it's a slur, but no more so than the way we use terms like "cunt" as a term of endearment. Insults in Australia tend to be based more around the Taller poppies than the average Joes. Wasn't trying to bite your head off, but when people call us bigots for how we refer to ourselves in and amongst ourselves it seems a tad like the kettle and pot syndrome. There are the few that look down on bogans but bearing in mind they make up most of our population its narrow minded to take the instant view that its a term of derision. Just because you don't understand the relation doesn't mean it's an insult. Do you jump on African Americans when they drop the "N" bomb? Because that is what you guys are doing here.

    --
    War is the statesman's game, the priest's delight, the lawyer's jest, the hired assassin's trade.- Shelley
  151. Re:I'm still waiting for my DVD from Enormoushop.c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Contact EnormouShop Customer Support Online. They seem very eager to help with all credit-related issues.

  152. What About the Military Option? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So when will we ever invade Nigeria and teach these a$$holes a lesson, and get all the stolen money back? I don't care how poor and frustrated they are, we shouldn't let them get away with this.