If I wanted to run an experiment to test how susceptible to scams the LW community actually was, this is exactly how I would do it.
Please note, in most versions of such scams the perpetrator does not actually send money (as in step 1 in the OP). Instead they use some combination of fake checks (yes, printed checks!), fake "payment confirmation" emails or fake websites along with social engineering and time pressure, to make the victim think money has been sent, in the hope that they will "refund" the overpayment before realising the initial payment was not real.
So if you're reading the OP and thinking "I can just collect the money in step 1 and then ignore the refund request" (whether planning to donate yourself, or even keep it), it's not likely to work out either.
Gotta give props to them for steelmanning their marks. Leswrong cant be the most gullible user base.
I and some of my friends have gotten emails from scammers who say they want to buy several paintings from my artist website, but are moving and want to use a bank check- or something similar. What I have done is reply that I will only accept payments through PayPal. Then I never hear from them again. Bitcoins would also work. The problem with testing it out by accepting a check or Bank order and depositing it in case it is for real is that you will get hit by a hefty fee from the bank if it bounces.
I was messaged by and responded to both. I suspect they're different people.
I also am not sure they're scams in the traditional sense. An employer match is the sort of thing that encourages this sort of thinking:
Whether or not this is within the letter of a match policy depends on the specific policy, but it's typically against the spirit and recommended against by Double the Donation. So even if there is no lurking chargeback, I would caution against this as burning the commons for short-term gain.
Also, if you have a strange story, keep Robin Hanson's recent Facebook post in mind:
If someone ever wants to give me $1M+ out of the blue, I hope they'll do more than send me an email w/o phone number I could call to confirm
Keeping that in mind, so far hans_jonsson seems legit. (I've only put a moderate amount of effort into verifying his claims.)
I was messaged by and responded to both. I suspect they're different people.
Update: they are different people, but the first one was working for the second one.
After the Nigerian space scam, the Nigerian rationalist scam. The first was surreal, but this... chapeau.
Note for whoever is behind this scam:
Next time, when picking a set of people to target, try to go for people who don't make a habit of studying epistemic rationality.
Let's not break our arms patting ourselves on the back, at least not until the data's in. At the moment we could be more, less, or equally susceptible to scamming than our demographics generally are.
It'd be interesting to see which, though.
And if this is presented as some sort of "competition" to see whether LW is less susceptible than the general populace, then if anyone has fallen for it, that can further discourage them from reporting it. A lot of this is exploiting the banking system's lack of transparency as to just how "final" a transaction is; for instance, if you deposit a check, your account may be credited even if the check hasn't actually cleared. So scammers take advantage of the fact that most people are familiar with all the intricacies of banking, and think that when their account has been credited, it's safe to send money back.
I was surprised to see mention of MIRI and Existential Risk. That means that they did a little research. Without that, I'd be >99% sure it was a scam.
I wonder if this hints at their methodology. Assuming it is a scam, I'd guess they find small but successful charities, then find small tight-knit communities organized around them and target those communities. Broad, catch-all nets may catch a few gullible people, but if enough people have caught on then perhaps a more targeted approach is actually more lucrative?
Really, it's a shame to see this happen ev...
We have a pretty stupid banking system if you can cancel a transaction after the target has had time to make a transaction back to you. Or it should be straitghforward and fee-less to cancel that second transaction as a consequence.
You might want to repost this to Discussion if your intention is for the thread to get as much visibility as possible.
I haven't looked at facebook today but this could be a good thing to repost to the facebook group.
My referenced explanation was based on the explanation of the concept at http://money.stackexchange.com/questions/67941/scam-or-real-a-woman-from-facebook-apparently-needs-my-bank-account-to-send-mon
The comments baffle me. I think it can be taken for granted that people on this site have an elevated sense of skepticism -- perhaps not enough to repel ALL scams, but certainly enough to recognize a scam when your attention is explicitly drawn to it contemporaneously. Why are we now wasting time with in-depth discussion ABOUT scams and methodology, WITH the scammer in the conversation? And if you believe him not to be a scammer, why are you putting a burden of proof onto him to countersignal "fishy behavior" rather than simply lay out behaviors which will not be tolerated, or setting up an escrow Bitcoin wallet?
That's pretty well tailored to the community here, but there are still some red flags. How would them sending money to you and you donating it to MIRI "accelerate the value"? Also, why would a legit matcher not simply want confirmation of your donation without them ever touching the money?
Not to mention, is it really this easy to use anti-fraud tools to perpetrate fraud?
Surely, as rationalists, we should do a controlled test to determine if these are scams? This will require some blindly chosen users to respond in a variety of different ways, some of whom should go through with the possible scam, and report the results.
EDIT: I think it's time to come clean. No, I am not the scammer, but this post wasn't serious. I'm rather surprised anyone thought it could be, to be honest!
No, if we're rationalist, we should figure out if the cost of doing the tests is worth the expected gain from getting the test results. If we're fairly certain that it's a scam already (so test results won't change the situation much) and if the tests are expensive, it might be a better idea not to test.
Hi, I first discovered this site a few years ago, but never really participated on it. Looking back, it appears I only commented once or twice, saying something condescending about morality. Recently, I rediscovered the site, because I started noticing updates on a Facebook group (no longer) affiliated with it. What's funny is I only realized I had an account when I tried to register under the exact same User Name. I've started reading the sequences and am interested in participating in the discussions. I've thought intensely about certain topics since I w...
Recently, multiple suspicious user accounts were created on Less Wrong. These accounts don't post any content in the forum. Instead, they are used only to send private messages to the existing users.
Many users have received a copy of the same message, but different variants exist, too. Here are the examples I know about. If you have received a different variant, please post it in a comment below this article:
I don't know yet about anyone who replied and got scammed, so this is all based on indirect evidence. If you got scammed, please tell me. If you are ashamed, I can publish your story anonymously. Your story could help other potential victims.
Most likely, the scheme is the following:
(Thanks to ChristianKl for explaining the system in the Open Thread.)
If you replied to the original message and now you are already in the middle of the process, please inform your bank as soon as possible! Even if the step 2 didn't happen yet, so you can still get out without losing money, warning your bank about the scammer could help other potential victims.
Warning: If you have already received a check or a payment confirmation, and someone is asking you to send the overpayment back quickly, do not send anything. The check or the payment confirmation is fake, and the goal is to make you send money before you find out. (Thanks to qsz for explaining.)