Hacker News Reader

Comment by pixl97 | Hacker News Reader

>That they need to be allowed to scam someone else to avoid worsening their situation?

There are two levels of scammers here. One is the low level scammer that is directly interfacing with you. In these situations they are also victims that are being held by violence. Simply put if bad things happen to these people or not the scam will remain as this level is rather cheap.

The bosses will observe from a higher level based on the successful feedback and direct their efforts there, much like a spammer that calculates the return on millions and millions of sent emails.

To catch the bosses we need nation state/global level enforcement against said people. The problem is they quite often pay their local governments handsomely to protect against them.

View on HN

> the scam will remain as this level is rather cheap.

The less efficient you can make the process, the less you make it attractive to put resources into scaling it. Focus on making them generate the types of proof that aren't as easy to fabricate or at least give them as little information about why their initial approach failed as possible by playing along for a while after you catch on so they can't figure out how they got caught.

The victim you are being manipulated by is judged on their numbers, not on how hard they tried.

While what you are saying is theoretically effective, it assumes that enough people will do this to impact the business model… they won’t. So all you will accomplish is increasing human misery of trafficked slaves or their loved ones, while accomplishing nothing besides feeling a sense of retribution.

This problem requires state-level intervention, but it is mostly getting state level support.

The incentive alignment on this is not going to allow improvement. Perhaps if client nations imposed sanctions on nations that allowed this kind of industry, that could be changed.

> So all you will accomplish is increasing human misery of trafficked slaves or their loved ones, while accomplishing nothing besides feeling a sense of retribution.

You seem to be asserting that we should let them scam someone else. If you think that funding the scammers to protect their vicitm workers is moral then you should do it yourself rather than pawning the costs off on someone less aware who might unintentionally feed the scammers money they can't afford to lose.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com