[HN Gopher] The immediate victims of a con would rather act as i...
___________________________________________________________________
The immediate victims of a con would rather act as if the con never
happened
Author : Tomte
Score : 140 points
Date : 2024-01-07 17:32 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu)
| 082349872349872 wrote:
| see also "cooling the mark out"
| senkora wrote:
| I was not familiar with this term and found this blog post that
| explains it:
| https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2002/10/31/cooling-the...
| neilv wrote:
| > _What really annoys me in these situations is how the
| institutions show loyalty to the people who did research
| misconduct._
|
| "Loyalty" means different things to different people, and not
| necessarily "doing what that party wants".
|
| So, if you don't call this "loyalty", it might be easier to
| imagine more of the possible/likely reasons for doing something
| that coincides with what that party wants, in an instance.
| SiempreViernes wrote:
| I'm wondering if the loyalty really is with the cheater, or if
| they are instead trying to protect weaker parties like the
| students and post-docs that can be largely or event entirely
| innocent. The latter option is possible and hard to discern
| from the outside.
| neilv wrote:
| Yes, and some academics have altruistic hearts of gold. (I
| used to assume they were all like that, and that was half the
| reason I wanted to be a professor, thinking of the university
| as a testbed or incubator for a better world.)
|
| As an exercise to flesh out the space of possible reasons for
| behavior that seems misaligned with academic ideals, you can
| also imagine different characteristics and profiles of some
| hypothetical academics: selfish self-interest and a touch of
| ethical flexibility (that might've given them an edge to get
| to the position of influence), arrogance (from the position
| or other reasons), personal relationships (these are
| colleagues, often friends, sometimes more), group solidarity,
| normal human biases, funding politics, being beholden to
| organizations that are cynical or misaligned with what a good
| academic would do.
| rgrieselhuber wrote:
| https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00332747.1952.11...
| mmazing wrote:
| Seems like this relates to many other areas of human interaction,
| politics comes to mind for one ...
| KittenInABox wrote:
| Has anyone explored being the victim of a con and being a victim
| of other forms of abuse? For example, people who were beaten as
| children by their guardians also get angry when informed their
| guardians were abusive for doing so. People who get really upset
| when told their significant other is being controlling,
| manipulative, neglectful, etc.
| scrubs wrote:
| Throughout the 1960s to the mid-1980s it used to fashionable
| because it was so helpful to reconstitute manufacturing corporate
| culture around a three axis orientation of quality through SPC,
| of customers, and profit. This was done to avoid the distortions
| that ruin companies in the medium and long term including
| bankruptcy, layoffs, junk products, and all the related human BS
| that comes with it: corporate politics, in-fighting, lying, and
| so on. Think Ishikawa's tunnel analogy in his "What Is Total
| Quality Control?: The Japanese Way." Some organizations included
| additional emphasis on responsibilities to society.
|
| I miss those days.
|
| I've run into too many individuals in corporate American that:
|
| * manage up/down
|
| * think that if you're not hustling all the time actively
| managing your rep -- because everybody is doing it -- you're a
| chump
|
| * A particularly ripe scenario to see this play out in tech
| sectors is cloud migration in companies that previously had large
| private data centers. The amount of BS and mid to upper level
| management cowardice that enables the in-fighting over capex,
| headcount, and control is truely disheartening.
|
| Here in my backyard --- the US --- I sometimes seriously wonder
| if "American Management" is euphemism for political players in
| soap operas.
| edmundsauto wrote:
| Can you elaborate why you think managing up/down is bad? Maybe
| we differ in definition, but I take it to mean customize how
| you communicate (zoom in / zoom out) based on the intended
| audiences typical scope and responsibilities.
|
| I don't want to tell my skip super in depth technical details
| they don't need to know. It's my job to process it for them.
| eschulz wrote:
| This reminds me of the legal marketing field, which is one in
| which I have some experience. Just look at the billboards along
| the highways in major US cities and you'll be reminded how
| horrendously competitive law is in the US (and it's becoming more
| and more competitive by the year - lawyers are everywhere and
| covid encouraged a bunch of college students to consider law
| school).
|
| I believe the vast majority of marketing businesses for lawyers
| are legit, but if there are scams then the bad actors could be
| encouraged by the idea that lawyers are the last people in the
| world who want to be outed as having fallen for a scam. Lawyers
| must put forth an image of being intelligent, informed, and
| aggressive; being the victim of a shady business doesn't fit this
| model.
| cowthulhu wrote:
| My (very naive) thinking would be that lawyers are the worst
| demographic to con, since they have the skills and resources to
| try and make themselves whole again (at the expense of the
| conman), maybe with a few NDAs throw in for good measure. Is
| this not the case?
| eschulz wrote:
| My take is that lawyers will have to compare the damages they
| suffered to the potential harm their reputation will sustain
| if they become well known for being victims. Did they pay
| $1,000 for a subpar product? If so, they might not act beyond
| issuing some threats. However, if they lost $100,000 to a
| thief then they probably will act.
|
| I have spoken with many lawyers who have threatened marketers
| with lawsuits, and in many cases the threat will help the
| lawyer. I have had a few lawyers tell me they WILL NOT file a
| lawsuit (why sue for $500 considering the time and court
| fees), but that it only costs about 60 cents to send a
| verbose letter using their firm's letterhead. They understand
| the old warning "if you sue for a cow, you may end up losing
| a cow".
|
| Just as with a successful con against esteemed scientists,
| any skilled conman will know his target well and understand
| how he can fly just below the radar and probably avoid
| getting called out and destroyed.
| kstrauser wrote:
| My naive thinking would be that a given lawyer would be
| either impossible to con, or ripe for the taking because they
| believe they're impossible to con. I'd also guess that if you
| could manage to con a lawyer, they'd rather fall on a sword
| than admit they were swindled.
| renewiltord wrote:
| In the foreword for _Animal Farm_ (in the del Rey edition, I
| think), Orwell writes that he was asked by tankie friends to keep
| quiet about the USSR 's crimes because they were the best chance
| for Communism.
|
| Bullshit from scientists is normal. They're just people after
| all. But people who join the Culture War on one side must
| necessarily choose Science as a side despite it being just a
| technique for knowledge, not a team. And then they're forced to
| defend it in some way.
|
| I've posted years ago about how biotech science is sometimes
| faked https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25926188
|
| I wonder whether this reaction to a con is necessarily Western,
| though. I've noticed it in Americans as well. They'll get conned
| by corrupt politicians and rather than admit the con, they'll
| defend them and pretend they weren't conned.
|
| In the East, the attitude is different. It's more like "damn,
| well what can you do". Both failure-oriented but different. I
| wonder if it comes from different structures of pride.
| scrubs wrote:
| Stupidity in large human organizations does not favor or
| exclude the east or west. It's endemic to humans. Wasn't that
| the essential criticism of "The Lord of the Flies" and, in
| terms of putative solutions, Volaire's satire in "Candide"?
|
| Leaving the conversation at I saw this or that ... is too
| incomplete. The question is what are we going to do about it.
| Management at scientific institutions should have more backbone
| not less on BS data reporting.
| deanCommie wrote:
| > he was asked by tankie friends to keep quiet about the USSR's
| crimes because they were the best chance for Communism.
|
| I have a lot of empathy for the tankies of that era. It was
| clear that people like Stalin were truly evil, but it was also
| clear from centuries of evidence that capitalism was
| exploitative and needed upheaval.
|
| On PAPER, Communism sounds great. I do think people genuinely
| believed there were simply growing pains and once through them
| something what today's generation thinks of as the "Star Trek
| The Next Generation Utopia" could be achievable.
|
| There are still people that think it might have succeeded if
| given a genuine chance, and not undermined by the rich in the
| west.
|
| In retrospect we now know they were wrong, and probably Russia
| was the worst place for communism to succeed. A society like
| China is probably the one in which it has the best chance, and
| even there we see that successful communism requires some free
| market economics and some pretty heinous repression.
| dragontamer wrote:
| I've put myself into classical con situations out of curiosity.
|
| Even when I purposefully seek to be conned, it's embarrassing to
| have it happen.
|
| In my case, simple subway con artist performing the classic magic
| trick where you bet money to determine where the queen is under
| three cards. As a hobbyist magician I'm able to follow him as the
| subway scammer performs the drop, switching the queen for another
| card.
|
| I'm not ready for the smooth talking however that the con artist
| employees afterwards. It's a humbling experience but one that I'm
| happy to have lost real $$$ so that I can remember the lesson for
| the rest of my life.
|
| -----------
|
| Coming to terms with smooth talkers and how they're able to
| easily manipulate you, even if you are familiar with the tricks
| (both slight of hand tricks as well as 'Magicians Force' smooth
| talking / distractions).
|
| It does make me want to practice classical street magic again, as
| it's so obviously associated with thievery and con-jobs. But
| street magic is perhaps the 'safe' way of doing it all so that no
| one gets upset afterwards.
|
| But in any case, just imagine a street magician who makes your
| money disappear. That's what it feels like. Even at the amateur
| level, you'll fall prey to the 2nd level or 3rd levels of
| trickery, cause the street con-man has probably tricked
| overconfident amateurs before.
|
| ------
|
| I've heard stories of people who talk with street vendors selling
| lotions or other items as well and falling for those sales
| pitches. In my experience, it's similar to the street magician-
| thief and uses many similar techniques.
|
| No one likes the fact that our actions, reactions and behaviors
| are so predictable that literal con-artists can make a living
| predicting and planning around our reactions to mislead us. (Or
| in safer circles, a street magician doing the same thing but for
| wonder/amazement rather than stealing your money)
|
| --------
|
| EDIT: For those not in the know, a drop and/or steal are magician
| slight of hand tricks that switch cards or other objects in a way
| that most people can't follow.
|
| Magicians Force is a question that gives the illusion of choice,
| often a choice that doesn't matter for the trick. But the
| illusion of choice is sufficient to keep the audience's attention
| and let the audience think that they're still in control of the
| situation. Or in other words: smooth talking.
|
| There are many ways to drop, steal or use Magicians Force. But
| using them all together in one smooth action is how magicians (or
| con-artists on the street) do their tricks.
| wincy wrote:
| I was listening to Joe Rogan interview David Blaine and he said
| there are plenty of card players where it's literally
| undetectable the tricks they use, even with cameras everywhere.
| Makes me have no interest in playing card games with anyone but
| a few friends.
| dragontamer wrote:
| Oh, there's so many card manipulation tricks it's hilarious.
|
| I can false shuffle a deck, I can seed a deck through
| shuffles. I can false cut. Tricks with my hands to 'do
| nothing's with a deck even though it looks like I'm shuffling
| or cutting the deck.
|
| When we get to truly skilled magicians, they can perfect
| shuffle (IIRC, 8x rifle shuffles in a row with perfect
| precision returns the deck to it's original state). They can
| perfect cut (two cuts that return the deck to the original
| state). And they can therefore look like they're shuffling,
| when in fact they're just leaving the deck in the same state
| the whole time (or at least they have a plan to return the
| deck back to it's original state later on).
|
| There's also hidden cuts and hidden shuffles. To change the
| deck even though it didn't look like anything happens.
|
| So if I perfect cut a deck, say a silly story to you, then
| hidden perfect cut the deck back to it's original state, the
| audience probably doesn't realize their chosen cards remain
| on the top of the deck. (Even if they spot the second hidden
| cut, they likely don't realize the importance of it)
|
| ----------
|
| I did this once or twice (try) to pass out like 4x Royal
| Flushes on Poker night to prove a point lol. Seed some royal
| flushes on the top, false shuffle the deck, etc etc. IIRC
| only two Royal Flushes survived but the point was made.
|
| It's certainly fun. But it does make me wonder how people are
| supposed to trust the dealer when so many of these tricks
| exist and aren't even that hard to do or practice. (Perfect
| shuffles are really hard. But the other stuff is just
| pretending to be a klutz and undoing the shuffle by dropping
| the cards or other such planned clumsiness, and then
| confidently pretending that the deck was truly shuffled).
| These sorts of things are more believable before your friends
| realize you are ridiculously practiced with card tricks.
|
| Still though, street con artists are on another level. I
| guess when it's your living you get much better at it.
| mhb wrote:
| I think that it is thought
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riffle_shuffle_permutation)
| that seven riffle shuffles randomize a deck. So you may be
| misremembering that eight returns it to the original state.
| dragontamer wrote:
| Riffle shuffles have randomness because it's assumed no
| human can:
|
| 1. Pick up exactly 26 cards.
|
| 2. Shuffle exactly alternating left-right-left-right
| across all 26 cards.
|
| But both of these feats are possible with practice.
| Repeat this perfect riffle shuffle enough times and the
| deck returns to it's exact original state. It's just
| simple math at that point, but it does mean you need
| perfection on every action.
|
| ----------
|
| When a normie riffle shuffles, of course it's random. The
| issue is that magicians are ridiculously skilled in
| secret ways that are incredibly difficult to detect.
|
| That is: a magician can look like they're shuffling, but
| in reality they're actually seeding and returning the
| deck to a state they want it to be in for their tricks.
|
| Or a cheater at poker for that matter.
|
| -------
|
| That's okay though. If you can 'only' pickup exactly 26
| cards consistently, you are skilled enough to perfect
| cut, which is still enough for a lot of tricks.
| gjhr wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riffle_shuffle_permutation#
| Per...
|
| Shows that perfect shuffles can return the deck to the
| original state.
| lowbloodsugar wrote:
| That's why player behind dealer always cuts after dealer
| shuffled.
| seeAls0 wrote:
| See also: genius CEOs who react in disbelief _their_ startup
| didn't unicorn like the VCs promised!
|
| It's workers or users who misunderstood what they were trying to
| do! This is how capitalism works; they business, you give money!
| dilyevsky wrote:
| > their startup didn't unicorn like the VCs promised!
|
| I think you got that backwards
| caseysoftware wrote:
| > _What really annoys me in these situations is how the
| institutions show loyalty to the people who did research
| misconduct. When researcher X works at or publishes with
| institution Y, and it turns out that X did something wrong, why
| does Y so often try to bury the problem and attack the messenger?
| Y should be mad at X; after all, it's X who has leveraged the
| reputation of Y for his personal gain. I'd think that the leaders
| of Y would be really angry at X, even angrier than people from
| the outside. But it doesn't happen that way. The immediate
| victims of the con would rather act as if the con never happened.
| Instead, they're mad at the outsiders who showed them that they
| were being fooled._
|
| See: Harvard, Dec 2023 - Jan 2024
| mrcartmeneses wrote:
| It's because universities are as political an environment as it
| is possible to get. The academics are all completely aware that
| their position is based on fear and favour, much a like a
| medieval court or -- to use a more modern example -- the
| Russian Communist Party during the USSR.
|
| There is no truth. Only the party line. Follow it or get
| spiked.
|
| This problem is caused primarily by the low number of places to
| work and the extremely high number of very high quality young
| academics hoping to replace those in positions of power
| jdewerd wrote:
| > Russian Communist Party during the USSR
|
| Or during Putin.
|
| Here's another: Donald Trump's inner court.
| flybrand wrote:
| How is that different then their oppositions 'inner' court?
| shuntress wrote:
| You are being overly dramatic.
|
| _Everywhere_ has politics. It's not special in universities.
| hnbad wrote:
| Explain Jordan Peterson then. The only reason he ended up
| being "expelled" (and it was more of a resignation than an
| expulsion really) is because he stopped practicing for years
| and continued identifying himself with the position he held
| at the university while engaging in conduct that violated the
| professional code of ethics for that position. That's like
| working at McDonald's as a shift manager, going on indefinite
| leave, then touring media appearances to talk about your
| opinion on social issues while always making sure you're
| introduced as a McDonald's shift manager and then saying "You
| can't fire me, I quit!" when McDonald's politely asks you to
| stop associating with them in public. Hardly the academic
| behavior on par with the Russian Communist Party.
| JakeAl wrote:
| I go through this every time I have to ask for a refund and tell
| a business I just want a refund so we can part ways instead of
| filing complaints with the Better Business Bureau and with the
| FTC.
| MobileVet wrote:
| Shame and pride are such strong motivators.
|
| My wife was taken by a very elaborate and well-crafted scam in
| November. In retrospect, it all sounds ridiculous... but in the
| moment, with kids in tow, it was very convincing. It was so
| traumatizing that when it was over and she finally realized it
| was a scam, she was relieved! They had convinced her she was
| going to jail and that was terrifying. Losing the money was less
| bad than going to jail.
|
| It was also EXTREMELY well scripted with a TON of psychology and
| clever moments that were well rehearsed. They also had a
| background track playing with 'police station like' audio and had
| spoofed the Orange County Sheriff's phone number. One
| psychological trick that they employed was a very 'stepped'
| approach to the scam.
|
| If you say it all out loud, it is obvious, but if you go step by
| step, each one was somewhat plausible. Lastly, by posing as law
| enforcement, they tugged on a natural tendency to follow orders
| and avoid being in trouble. My stomach drops when I think I am
| getting pulled over... being told you have an outstanding warrant
| was quite a gut punch for her.
|
| Things to remember:
|
| * ALWAYS hang up and call people on a phone number you enter
| yourself.
|
| * If someone tells you to check the number by looking it up, they
| are very likely spoofing it. Hang up and call the police.
|
| * The police don't call you if they are trying to serve a
| warrant, they show up.
|
| * A judge's 'gag order' does not mean you can't talk to a family
| member or legal counsel.
|
| * NEVER pull money out of an account for someone you don't know
| without talking to a friend or spouse.
|
| * ANY change in the situation is a red flag - bring the money to
| the courthouse. - its getting late, we use an after hours
| processor - you are running out of time, just wire it
| dudinax wrote:
| From one of my family members: if the bank transaction doesn't
| go through, and you call the bank and they tell you it's
| probably a scam, don't overrule them.
| hnbad wrote:
| Also if you're in the EU make sure to check the actual
| SEPA/IBAN code. The first two letters are the country code
| and if this is supposed to be an organization/institution in
| your country then those should match most transactions you've
| done before. Don't be fooled just because the country code
| letter combination happens to also be the initialism of
| something else or a state/city/etc involved.
|
| I've had an accountant fall for a company registration scam
| and while the letterhead was plausible, the bank account was
| in an entirely different country, which should have given
| pause.
| par wrote:
| Is there anywhere we can read up on this scam?
| MobileVet wrote:
| I posted details in a reply to myself above
| hnbad wrote:
| I think the common thread with all such scams is creating a
| sense of urgency and high stakes. I'd generalize what you said
| though: if something involves a legal process or supposed pre-
| existing correspondence, anything crucial will happen in
| writing or in person and they'll be able to specifically
| provide you with the dates and details of anything they claim
| to have on you.
|
| Personally I haven't had fake police calls yet (well, except
| for one Eastern European lady in a call center using a fake
| mobile number while pretending in broken English to be from
| INTERPOL, whom I immediately hung up on) but I have had calls
| about contracts I supposedly agreed to over the phone and was
| going to have to pay for either way but could now immediately
| agree to a compromise so I wouldn't have to pay the full amount
| owed but order (this time for real) something else or some
| contrivance like that. Of course calling back was not an option
| because this was already about to hit collections and they had
| recorded my previous (non-existant) call but couldn't play it
| back to me right now. It was all a bit ridiculous but I still
| felt a bit unnerved until I called my lawyer and learned that
| even if everything they said were true the contract as
| described would be invalid and any claims would have to be sent
| in writing before anything actionable even happened on my end.
| MobileVet wrote:
| This scam is pretty active right now. My brother in law was
| called 2 days prior and they called my wife again 2 days
| later...
|
| Rough scam script:
|
| - <background audio of police station> - hello, is this XYZ? -
| this is Officer Z, do you agree to abide by Judge ABC's orders?
| - we have been trying to reach you by mail about this case. It
| has to do with a minor. - the judge has issued a gag order, do
| not talk with anyone about this - look up the number from the
| phone, see I am really calling from the courthouse
|
| == keep you on the phone, my wife actually didn't pick up when
| I called in the midst of the scam and followed with a text ==
|
| - someone committed a crime using your name, we don't think it
| was you but because you didn't respond to mail, there is a
| warrant for your arrest - you need to post bail - go withdraw
| money from the bank and bring it to the courthouse - where are
| you? The courthouse is closing - it's getting late, use a 3rd
| party processor setup during Covid - go to grocery store, use a
| CoinStar machine - send money to phone number (using XLM
| currency)
| eurleif wrote:
| >The police don't call you if they are trying to serve a
| warrant, they show up.
|
| But be aware that the converse isn't true: someone who shows up
| at your door claiming to be law enforcement with a warrant
| isn't necessarily legitimate. E.g.:
| https://madison.com/news/local/crime-courts/jack-mcquestion-...
| hnbad wrote:
| This isn't really surprising. Cons are literally "confidence
| tricks", i.e. betrayals of social trust, which can be
| disorienting and distressing, even traumatizing. We know that
| rape victims, to use an extreme example, often try to normalize
| what happened to them - especially when the attacker was a close
| friend or intimate partner. A common story is a victim being
| sexually abused by a partner in the evening and making their
| abuser breakfast the next morning because then it can't have been
| abuse and must have been consensual because why would a victim
| make breakfast for their abuser - that'd be absurd.
|
| Nobody wants to be a victim. Some people like to play the victim,
| sure, and some victims (usually after quite a bit of therapy) try
| to own their victim status to come to terms with what they've
| experienced but victims are at least as likely if not more to
| pretend nothing happened (even when they're traumatized and their
| denial is perpetuating that trauma) as they are to speak up.
|
| With cons that are scams there's of course also the chance to
| play hot potato: you may have been the mark but that only makes
| you a victim if you are the end of the chain. If you can still
| con someone else to make your money back, you didn't get fooled,
| you just got inconvenienced at worst and you're not really at
| fault for conning the next person because after all you wouldn't
| have done it if you hadn't been conned to begin with. Crypto, one
| might argue, might be one such example.
| jongjong wrote:
| I'm all too familiar with this. Also, they will pretend that the
| con is not happening while they are in the middle of being
| conned.
| MenhirMike wrote:
| Didn't people literally send letters to Charles Ponzi in prison -
| after he got convicted and all - asking to invest even more money
| into his scheme? Or is that an urban myth?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-01-07 23:00 UTC)