• tourist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 year ago

    why bother with the variations?

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

    messed up

    • Deebster
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      86
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      ·
      1 year ago

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

      • Adalast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

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

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • Lmaydev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would say more likely to get around bot protection.

    • Jknaraa@lemmy.ml
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

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