[FoRK] "If you do not respond (to our scammy ploy), Google will mark your business as closed."
Stephen D. Williams
sdw at lig.net
Fri Sep 15 15:29:10 PDT 2017
On 9/15/17 1:51 PM, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote:
> Have you been surfing pr0n? Send me all your browser version and plugin stats. I'll tell you if there's a 0day privacy scam.
If I were, it would be only the finest, most reputable variety. Sketchy sites should only be visited in a VM or container,
preferably on a virtual desktop service. I really wish I had subuser for MacOS. But I could use it on Linux as needed, even on my
> sharing code isn’t safe. Every time we try out some stranger’s script we put ourselves at risk. Despite the occasional claim that
> linux is a secure operating system, haphazardly sharing programs is NOT secure.
> Furthermore, the fragmentation of the linux desktop means that packaging work is needlessly repeated. Programs that build and run
> on Fedora must be repackaged for Ubuntu. This takes time away from creating great free open source software.
> Subuser with Docker attacks both problems simultaneously. Docker provides an isolated and consistent environment for your programs
> to run in. Subuser gives your desktop programs access to the resources they need in order to function normally.
Xpra X11 bridge
> Most likely he just has too many people to scam because I checked the "too savvy to rip off" list on the dark web and you
> definitely aren't on it.
Heh. There are many, many Stephen Williams'. You would think that one of us would get on it.
Since I've been using the same email address since 1992, I can unfortunately posit this:
It's not a spam list unless my address is on it.
> On 9/15/2017 1:22 PM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>> A company has never been so lucky that they hung up on me. I get these scammy calls all the time, even though my numbers are
>> registered as no-spam. This ploy goes way too far making that statement. The guy answered, asked my name, and then hung up
>> after a few seconds. Am I on a 'too savvy to rip off' list? If I would have got the company name and address, I could have made
>> an accurate report or had some fun at the courthouse.
>> Pity the poor fools who fall for these things.
>> This was the CallerID, but as is often the case, I very much doubt it was from this person:
>> 650-851-3995 Redwood City
>> I have a combination of 703 and 650 numbers. I get the same robo calls on both sets of numbers, always apparently from the same
>> exchange. They just spoof a similar number to fake people into answering. Sprint's anti-spam mechanism is pretty good, alerting
>> me accurately most of the time. We should charge any company that makes more than a certain number of outgoing calls some fee
>> per call.
More information about the FoRK