1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:20 pm UTC

It could also have something to do with bad forms. I often get paper forms which state they have to be filled in, either in block letters, or all caps (in reality they generally refer to a specific writing style used mostly for machine readable fonts generally also referred to as block letters in Dutch). The problem with this is that this writing style is case-insensitive while they often contain an e-mail field nowadays... I generally fill out this field using my regular handwriting because it has separate case characters, but I can imagine these mix-ups arising from people entering their e-mail in a case-insensitive format.

I had a similar issue with facebook when I wanted to correct my incorrect e-mail address (which should be in upper camelcase). Facebook refused to add the correct address, while giving an error message stating I already added that e-mail address (which was false), I then proceeded to remove that address and add the correct one, only to find out it was changed to all lower-case again (which probably explains why it was wrong to begin with). Fortunately I do have the all lower-case variety as an alias, but it's mostly a coincidence that it was available, my facebook data could just as easily have been sent to a complete stranger...

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby addams » Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:54 pm UTC

astrus wrote:
addams wrote:Nice story.
Reasonable people behaving reasonably.

That will never make drive time Radio.
Where is the tragedy? Where is the indignation?

For that matter; Where is the romance?
Did you read the sermons and become enlightened?

Did you fall in love with the subject matter?
Did you meet the author? Did you find yourself seeking more?

No? Just reasonable people being reasonable? (shrug)
That's ok. That is news worthy. Maybe you can give lessons.

I'm sorry but at the time I wasn't aware I'd need to make the story news worthy, maybe set fire to something or throw a tantrum on youtube about it but if it makes you happy I'll keep it in mind for next time.

I did read some of them, yes, but alas all I took from them was reinforcing my opinion that religion just doesn't work for me. I didn't suddenly have the answers to everything but maybe I did somethinng wrong.
I'm just a boring person trying to be reasonable, couldn't teach you anything that life couldn't teach you better. Maybe I should put a disclaimer somewhere to save you further disappointment, what do you think?

Nah. Don't go out of your way.
There are plenty of people to pick up The Slack.

Is that why they call those people Slackers?
Our human existence has been described as a game of Tug-of-War.

Some reasonable people on one side.
A huge number of Horribles on the other side.

A rope separates the two groups.
The Reasonable are pulling one way.
The Horribles are pulling the other way.

It is lovely Art. I like the idea.
It seems to me we should have at least one other choice.

Ok. Ok. Spectator. I don't like spectator sports. I want to play, too.
What if.... one day a few Reasonables wandered off?

List of stupid stuff Reasonables might do, if not engaged with Tug-o-War.

Spoiler:
1. Play shoot 'em up out on the open plain.
2. Meet in the meadow beyond Right Doing and Wrong Doing.

3. Chemistry.( opps.
4. Lunch.

Maybe it is an accurate description of Human Life.
The Bass Relief that I saw showed Human Forms.

Maybe the stone was carved to show a Moment in Time.
That Moment may be repeated endlessly.

The Individuals are different. The Roles are the same.
Six hour shifts and twenty four hour duty?

Would you walk up to The Rope and say, "I got it. You're off Duty."
"Have a good time; And! Don't forget to come back!"

It may have been a temple dedicated to our work life.
Can you understand why people might need to protect such a place?

It is beautiful old art. I often choose, "My favorite."
The Bass Relief of Gods pulling one way and The Horribles pulling the other way was my favorite.

Reasonable people go to museums. That could be on the list.
Fun Reasonables go out and Make History!

See? That is why Resonables must be kept busy, pulling on The Rope.
They are Trouble makers when not kept busy. Like a bunch of little kids.

Give them something fun to do and they are happy.
The Reaonable can make the mess and the Reasonables can clean it up.

What??

oh. Some religion has nothing to offer me.
Other religions do. I am willing to discuss the subject.

You write like a reasonable person.
Have you seen any other kind of person?

The digital age is weird. The comic touches the surface of weird.
A person can walk by you on the street; Bump into you and capture all data that is contained within your phone.

Some little old lady goes NutJob because you have all of her online documents?
"How did you get That?!?" she huffs and puffs.

Are you reasonable and explain that there was a mix-up.
"Just like in The Old Days. That woman at the PostOffice does not know you from Addam's Cat.
She, just, sees my Seven as your One. (shrug) We can fix this."


Or; Are you a Black Hat?
Do you use the info to worm into every detail of her life. Tell her where she was born.
Tell her other stuff too. Have a list. The poor thing. Heart Attack?

Black Hat Guys can cause Post Trauma, without touching a person nor raising their voices.
Not something to be proud of. right? Is it funny to you? What is real? Zeros and Ones?
Last edited by addams on Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:04 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 3099
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby orthogon » Sun Oct 20, 2013 3:57 pm UTC

astrus wrote:Offtopic: After lurking for what seems to be an eternity you finally got me to sign up for an account, congratulations. So, hi I'm the new guy. I hope most of you don't bite.

astrus wrote:I'm just a boring person trying to be reasonable, couldn't teach you anything that life couldn't teach you better. Maybe I should put a disclaimer somewhere to save you further disappointment, what do you think?

Welcome to the forum. People here generally don't bite, and especially not addams; her(?) posts do take some getting used to, and of course I can't know for sure what was meant, but I suggest you read it as a stream of consciousness or perhaps a poem inspired by your post and musing on the general state of the world, rather than any kind of criticism.

PinkShinyRose wrote:It could also have something to do with bad forms [...] I can imagine these mix-ups arising from people entering their e-mail in a case-insensitive format.

I was going to reply saying that e-mail addresses are case insensitive, but it turns out that I'm in the lucky 10,000: according to RFC 2821, the local-part is potentially case sensitive; although mail servers are discouraged from treating addresses for their own users in this way, servers (like Facebook) ought to preserve and respect case in e-mail addresses that they are using to generate outgoing messages. Still, your mail server must be quite unusual if it takes case into account and discards messages to pinkshinyrose or PINKSHINYROSE.

Those paper forms with little boxes to write the letters are straight out of the 1970s. I had to send something internationally via DHL the other day and had to fill one in. There were nowhere near enough characters and the format used in the country I was sending to didn't match their idea of an address (i.e. it wasn't in the USA). I spent ages trimming it down to fit whilst trying to guess which elements might be most important. Then I handed over the form and it turned out the computer system she had to enter it into had different fields and different lengths to the paper form; not only that but some of the fields were actually shorter on the computer version, so we had to do further trimming. I guess this pantomime is repeated thousands of times every day around the world. But it's not like sending stuff internationally is DHL's core business or anything, so.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:14 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:
PinkShinyRose wrote:It could also have something to do with bad forms [...] I can imagine these mix-ups arising from people entering their e-mail in a case-insensitive format.

I was going to reply saying that e-mail addresses are case insensitive, but it turns out that I'm in the lucky 10,000: according to RFC 2821, the local-part is potentially case sensitive; although mail servers are discouraged from treating addresses for their own users in this way, servers (like Facebook) ought to preserve and respect case in e-mail addresses that they are using to generate outgoing messages. Still, your mail server must be quite unusual if it takes case into account and discards messages to pinkshinyrose or PINKSHINYROSE.

To be honest, I never actually tried sending an e-mail to pinkshinyrose before I added the alias. I just concluded it was case sensitive after it accepted pinkshinyrose as an alias. I think there was an e-mail service commonly used in the Netherlands in the late 1990's which did use case sensitive addresses, unfortunately I don't remember which one. This is how I knew they were in principle case-sensitive in the first place.

I was rather surprised when looking up valid e-mail strings after S*L*J*O mentioned spaces were allowed (and then surprised again by the complexity of the special character limitations...), although I doubt this counts as something everyone knows...
orthogon wrote:Then I handed over the form and it turned out the computer system she had to enter it into had different fields and different lengths to the paper form; not only that but some of the fields were actually shorter on the computer version, so we had to do further trimming. I guess this pantomime is repeated thousands of times every day around the world. But it's not like sending stuff internationally is DHL's core business or anything, so.

I thought those forms were for easy OCR. They should just have one large multi-line box for international shipments if they lack a country specific form. They're creating jobs though. Besides, I think skilled IT staff is sufficiently scarce globally to make it too expensive to fix this issue and a lot of other issues. There's so much that could be automated (without being too complex tasks) or fixed but only a limited number of skilled engineers (of various kinds) and some of them are too busy creating new processes altogether (creating more stuff to be automated...).

BlckKnght
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 3:39 am UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby BlckKnght » Mon Oct 21, 2013 5:19 am UTC

My email is in the form [FirstName].[LastName] (I don't seem to be able to include an at sign or domain name without tripping the forum's spam filter, but the rest is as in the comic). As some others have noted, the dot is ignored by gmail, so I get messages for [FirstName][LastName] too.

I get a ton of email for other people, since neither of my names is especially uncommon (my first name is in the top 20 for men and my last name is just outside the top 300). Looking at the name frequencies from US Census Department's demographics data from 1990 (which I can't link to due to the spam filter), I crudely estimate there are at least 400 people in the US with my same first and last names (the real number is almost certainly larger, as I assumed there is no correlation between first and last name, while there surely is quite a bit of correlation related to ethnicity/national origin). My computation was frequency_firstname * frequency_lastname * male_population_of_usa.

I've received hundreds of email intended for those people, plus more for others in Canada and the UK (I got a confirmation email for a Canadian pre-paid mobile phone just today). A lot of them don't have identifying info, so its hard to tell how many of the messages were intended for the same people. I know of at least five or six distinct ones (usually after getting a receipt for an online order that included an address or other identifying information), but lots of others are essentially anonymous, other than the fact that they probably have my same name as me, since they included it in the email address. I could have seen messages for anywhere from 10 to 100 different people.

Gah, I just googled my name (after not having done so for a few years). I'm not only not on the front page any more (where I used to turn up a lot in years past due to participating in several open source software mailing lists in the late 90's and early 2000's), but most of the hits are about a child-rapist/murderer with my name. Yuck. On a less nasty note, the top hit is for an anesthesiologist, who'd been #1 for quite a while after writing a textbook, but now he's moved to the city that I live in (he used to be about 100 miles away in the same state). I don't think I've ever received email for either of those guys.

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Mon Oct 21, 2013 5:40 am UTC

Kichigo wrote:gmalivuk, that's exactly what I am saying. Google has allowed several people to have the same firstnamelastname and firstname.lastname combination. I have no idea who the first person to claim it was, it might have been me, but there are now several of us and we get each other's email occasionally.

Only occasionally? How the heck does a server make a particular mistake only a small, random percentage of the time? That sounds more like the kind of error only a human could make. You'd think, at the very least, it would be consistent in sending it to one person or the other. I suspect the actual problem is the senders entering the wrong version from time to time.

I really want to believe Google isn't that stupid. Evil, perhaps, but not stupid. They can't have programmed a system that lets you hack into anyone's email by simply registering the same address but with a period in it.
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

BigglesPiP
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:04 pm UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby BigglesPiP » Mon Oct 21, 2013 9:31 am UTC

I get this with <first initial><middle initial><surname>@gmail.com

My double even applied to be the communications manager at a university, which lead to this interesting email exchange:

On 7 May 2013 15:21, TXXXXX, AXXX <atXXXXXX@XXX.edu> wrote:
Thank you for your interest in the communications manager position at XXX XXXXX University. To further evaluate your candidacy, I would like to request a professional writing sample. This should be a piece that was produced in the normal course of your work, not written particularly for this application. Please also include a brief explanation indicating the purpose of the piece; who else played a role in drafting, reviewing, and approving (clients, editors, supervisors, etc.); and what results it achieved when published. Please submit the sample and explanation via e-mail to jjXXXX@XXX.edu by 8 a.m. Thursday.

Thank you in advance for this additional information and effort!

Sincerely,

SXXXXXX JXXXXXXX
Director of Marketing
XXXX XXXXX University


On May 7, 2013, at 11:13 AM, You <XXXXXXXX@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Can you please inform your communications manager candidate that she has been handing out my email address (XXXXXXXXX@gmail.com) in place of her own for the past two years. I have never been able to as I don't know her email address.

She will not have received your message quoted below.

Regards,
XXXX XXXXXXX, from the United Kingdom.

>


The times being reversed is because we are in very different time zones. I wonder if she got the job, would certainly help pay for her laser eye surgery and her son's flag football gear.

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:26 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:
PinkShinyRose wrote:It could also have something to do with bad forms [...] I can imagine these mix-ups arising from people entering their e-mail in a case-insensitive format.

I was going to reply saying that e-mail addresses are case insensitive, but it turns out that I'm in the lucky 10,000: according to RFC 2821, the local-part is potentially case sensitive; although mail servers are discouraged from treating addresses for their own users in this way, servers (like Facebook) ought to preserve and respect case in e-mail addresses that they are using to generate outgoing messages. Still, your mail server must be quite unusual if it takes case into account and discards messages to pinkshinyrose or PINKSHINYROSE.

I just realised the xkcd forum has the same issue...

dtobias
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:09 pm UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby dtobias » Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:10 pm UTC

Interestingly, a few days ago I was buying some stuff at Sears, and had to endure an annoying barrage of requests from the sales clerk to sign up for this, that, and the other thing... their loyalty card, their charge card, and so on, culminating in them printing a mile-long receipt with tons of terms, offers, and stuff. Does it really help sales to make the process of checking out so annoying? But anyway, somewhere in that process I did agree to joining their discount program or some such thing, but declined to give my e-mail address (who wants to get on yet another spam list? Besides, my real address is in a dot-name domain... yes to that earlier poster, there ARE others who do use it, but that can be a pain to give out one's email address to store clerks and such, where you might need endless back-and-forth to get it right, "No, there ISN'T any dot-com at the end of it". In this case, it took multiple rounds to get her to [I think] get my phone number correct after several screwups). Looking at what she was entering on the other side of the counter, it looked to me like she typed in something along the lines of my first and last name at gmail, just the sort of format that triggers the problem mentioned in this comic. So when it happens, it's not always the customer's fault; store clerks sometimes do that sort of thing just to get through forms that demand an email address when the customer doesn't want to give one. And these days, everybody seems to assume random addresses are at Gmail, much like they did for AOL a few years ago.

Speaking of what domain addresses are in, somebody earlier in the thread suggested getting your own domain, which I agree with (why tie your personal email address to somebody else's domain that could vanish or change in the future?), but this seems to go in one ear and out the other for an awful lot of people. There's a huge array of people and businesses that DO have their own domain but still insist on using email addresses in a non-owned domain, usually Gmail these days (and AOL a few years ago), but sometimes the local cable Internet provider or phone company. "Cottage-industry" people such as somebody selling collectibles online from their home via a modest website they got a friend to create for them seem particularly apt to this.

(Groan) This forum keeps rejecting my message as being flagged for spam, forcing lots of trial and error to figure out what the heck it's objecting to.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Klear » Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:37 pm UTC

dtobias wrote:(Groan) This forum keeps rejecting my message as being flagged for spam, forcing lots of trial and error to figure out what the heck it's objecting to.


You seem to be at least fifth person complaining about this issue in this thread. What is it about this topic that attracts the kind of people who don't read the rules after registering?

dtobias
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:09 pm UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby dtobias » Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:46 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
dtobias wrote:(Groan) This forum keeps rejecting my message as being flagged for spam, forcing lots of trial and error to figure out what the heck it's objecting to.


You seem to be at least fifth person complaining about this issue in this thread. What is it about this topic that attracts the kind of people who don't read the rules after registering?


I think it's that some of those "spam rules" pertain to substrings that resemble parts of Internet addresses, and since the topic of this thread is mistaken emails, one is prone to writing such address fragments in the course of discussing the ways people type or mistype or misunderstand such addresses.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3652
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby rmsgrey » Mon Oct 21, 2013 10:59 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
dtobias wrote:(Groan) This forum keeps rejecting my message as being flagged for spam, forcing lots of trial and error to figure out what the heck it's objecting to.


You seem to be at least fifth person complaining about this issue in this thread. What is it about this topic that attracts the kind of people who don't read the rules after registering?


I also noticed new posters making their first post in this thread more than I usually do in individual comic threads (which either means that there were more of them, or they were more noticeable)

So it's possible that part of the reason more people than usual fell foul of the spam filter unexpectedly is that there's a larger sample size...

User avatar
Monika
Welcoming Aarvark
Posts: 3673
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:03 am UTC
Location: Germany, near Heidelberg
Contact:

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Monika » Mon Oct 21, 2013 11:22 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:
Monika wrote:
orthogon wrote:Also: I don't want to be accused of gerbil swallowing, but did anyone think this one was a bit ageist? I can see how it happened, but Randall wouldn't dream of making a similar generalisation about women, say; and has made wonderful comics specifically countering such generalisations. And I feel like the joke would have worked just as well without it.

Yeah, it seemed a bit ageist.
I wonder what you wrote that the forum filters turned into gerbil swallowing. It's not political_correctness, that turns into AAAHHHH THUMPY WOOBLE HARRRRRPINK!!.

Filter? No, that's what I wrote!
Actually it is what I wrote, but only because the phrase you correctly guessed used to get converted to something about swallowing a gerbil.

Ah, politcally_correct gets filtered to "Basically Decent".

Kichigo wrote:I had this happen to me with firstname.lastname as my married last name is a lot more usual than my maiden name was. I thought at first it was because Google allows you to have a . in your email address then totally ignores it i.e. you can log in to the same account with or without the dot, but now I'm not so sure as I'm getting mail destined for someone in Richmond VA and someone in Ireland and I once got a bill for someone in the UK (where I am), phoned her up and totally freaked her at first!

So Google is doing something with matrices a bit like some of the old ISPs did to allow you to have 6 email addresses on one account. Only Google have somewhat messed it up. I'm reasonably ok about this as long as it's just emails about someone elses' ballet class but I'll feel a lot less ok if the police come charging in in the middle of the night looking for a far more dysfunctional person with the same name as me.

We're not going to get Google to fix this any time soon, if indeed they even perceive it as needing a fix.

BTW I'm waaay over 50. I guess I just assumed it meant people way older than me. But you're right, it's not like Randall to say something like that.

Kichigo wrote:gmalivuk, that's exactly what I am saying. Google has allowed several people to have the same firstnamelastname and firstname.lastname combination. I have no idea who the first person to claim it was, it might have been me, but there are now several of us and we get each other's email occasionally.

Kichigo wrote:Manauser, yes I think they have an intermittent fault. I can't imagine the parent that signed up for updates from their child's ballet class doesn't know their own email address. I test software and it feels like a defect to me.

You are mistaken. If you signed up for firstname.lastname@gmail.com YOU own firstnamelastname@gmail.com and f.i.r.s.t.n.a.m.e.l.a.s.t.n.a.m.e@gmail.com and any other variation of it. Nobody can sign up with any of the other e-mail addresses. Google made no mistake.

Either the mother of the ballet child wrote down the e-mail incorrectly (because of incorrect recall or momentary laps ... some people don't really have to give their e-mail address very often, so it can be surprisingly easy to make such a mistake ... I have problems remembering my user name on many sites) or illegibly or the person who copied it from the paper into the computer made a mistake or they guessed the mother's e-mail address and guessed incorrectly or they asked for the name and wrote it down from hearing and there was a mistake during this transcription or any other human mistake.
#xkcd-q on irc.foonetic.net - the LGBTIQQA support channel
Please donate to help these people

User avatar
freakish777
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:14 pm UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby freakish777 » Tue Oct 22, 2013 1:55 pm UTC

I have:

[Lastname] + [Firstname] @ gmail

I sometimes receive email that was intended for:

[Lastname] + [Firstname] + 1 @ gmail

Because people apparently don't read the guy's business card closely enough...


I think the guys an art teacher. One time I received a list of students names, home addresses, phone numbers, etc in an excel spreadsheet from whom I'm guessing was a co-worker...

User avatar
Jackpot777
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Jackpot777 » Wed Oct 23, 2013 12:58 pm UTC


User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby addams » Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:34 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
dtobias wrote:(Groan) This forum keeps rejecting my message as being flagged for spam, forcing lots of trial and error to figure out what the heck it's objecting to.


You seem to be at least fifth person complaining about this issue in this thread. What is it about this topic that attracts the kind of people who don't read the rules after registering?

Didn't you ever skip Orientation?

I was directed to 'Skip' Orientation.
Not a hard order for me to follow.

What kind of a person 'skips' Orientation?
My first few, I skipped because I did not know there Was an Orientation.

I seem to always be coming in while something is already happening.
I wandered into xkcd, while it was in full swing. I did not know what it was.

I still don't. I read the rules.
Someone on the forum put a blue link to the Rules.

It was a snotty post. Another snotty post said, (link) "It would not hurt YOU to read The Rules."
Spoiler:
The Rules can change with the 'click' 'click' 'click' of a keyboard. My key board makes a little noise. Does Yours?


viewtopic.php?f=7&t=30124

There. I will reread the Rules.
I remember thinking they all made sense.

#8. If it is behind a spoiler; Is it ok?
No....Link to it. (umm.) (i don't know how to do that.)

Spoiler:
Is computer a culture? Is computer a culture with an Oral Tradition?
Each Uninitiated must find some Computer Savvy 11 year old?

Culture. How would you write the Report?
In the early Twenty-First century, the bond between The Bread generations was established and maintained using The Machine.

The Bread generations are The GrandParents and Old Aunties. The generation in the middle is The Meat.
(It's a metaphor with very limited usefulness. To place all persons into three neat files based on their chronological age alone is unwise.


What are computer classes like?
Like walking into University Level Spanish I, with a background of ordering Tacos and Beer in their native language?

I did that. It sucked.
I looked at those people and said, "What are you doing?"
They looked at me and said, "'?Como?"

It seems that by 11 most children have the basics of Computer Manipulation as 2nd. Nature.
Is that True? When children get together They Must play with the computer.

They Have To teach each other how to use it!
Its an Oral Tradition about The Written Word?

How weird is That? To make it even more fun;
Think about how ethereal internet communications are.
How ethereal are Oral Traditions? Same?

Now you see it; Now you don't.

I don't know about you. MY computer can go from being a Technicolor Marvel to a Paperweight.
Computers are Great. They can come back from The Dead, sometimes.



The Rules:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=30124

Spoiler:
I know how to do that, now.
A new found SuperPower.

How to use it? (shrug)
#8. Link to other threads when those threads are discussing the same issue?

Threads is a very good name for what those discussions are.
Who named it?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
PinkShinyRose
Posts: 835
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 6:54 pm UTC
Location: the Netherlands

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby PinkShinyRose » Wed Oct 23, 2013 5:30 pm UTC

addams wrote:It seems that by 11 most children have the basics of Computer Manipulation as 2nd. Nature.
Is that True? When children get together They Must play with the computer.

They Have To teach each other how to use it!
Its an Oral Tradition about The Written Word?

How weird is That? To make it even more fun;
Think about how ethereal internet communications are.
How ethereal are Oral Traditions? Same?

So what it comes down to is that kids are better with computers because they have more time on their hands to teach eachother? (And possibly to go through instructions found somewhere else)...

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Klear » Wed Oct 23, 2013 9:07 pm UTC

addams wrote:
Klear wrote:You seem to be at least fifth person complaining about this issue in this thread. What is it about this topic that attracts the kind of people who don't read the rules after registering?


(...)
It was a snotty post. Another snotty post said, (link) "It would not hurt YOU to read The Rules."

(...)


Yeah, it was. I'm really tired of this happening all the time and tend to snap at people who complain about being filtered, even though doing so does nothing to prevent this from happening in the future (from new people) and all it can accomplish is making a newbie feel less welcome here. I should really just knock it off :oops:

User avatar
BlitzGirl
Posts: 9116
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby BlitzGirl » Wed Oct 23, 2013 9:36 pm UTC

Klear wrote:Yeah, it was. I'm really tired of this happening all the time and tend to snap at people who complain about being filtered, even though doing so does nothing to prevent this from happening in the future (from new people) and all it can accomplish is making a newbie feel less welcome here. I should really just knock it off :oops:

Don't worry - feed squirpies! :wink:

The OTT attracted so many newbies at one point that it ended up being better for our mental health to welcome them rather than get upset at them. If we got irritated at everyone who asked "Have you noticed the Javascript?" or "What's with the title text?" and yes, "Why can't I post links?" we would have been in a bad mood for a long Time!
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image<Profile
~.Image~.FAQ->Image

Yu_p
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:00 am UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Yu_p » Thu Oct 24, 2013 5:07 pm UTC

Oh, how I curse the day I registered for my mother (firstname)(lastname)31@gmail.com! Every time her login has expired she has to look up the number, so writing her correct email address for forms is utterly impossible. Add to this that both her first name and last name are very common.

I had some experiences myself though, even though my double-name as a first name isn't that common. My university email address as a PhD student is First-Second.Lastname@Universityhost and there is at least one full professor with the same last name on the same faculty. The others with that last name might be in less elevated positions. It was a bit more weird for my "intial.lastname" address from an institute, where I stayed for 4 month for a cooperation. Also: Asian applications for postdoc/PhD. There however, the only guy with the same last name was a postdoc himself...


PM 2Ring wrote:
aharrison wrote:And for companies sending me people's ridiculously personal and private information, I have a boilerplate nastygram that I reply with and point them to my guide "The Complete Idiots Guide to Correctly Validating Your Customer's Email Addresses". (You'll have to google for that title, I assume new accounts can't post links.)


Honestly, other than Steams two-factor authentification I have yet to see a case, where more than clicking an activation link is required.

----------

Anyway, getting emails that were never meant for you may turn out pretty compromising in times where every email is potentially monitored for indications of terrorist activity. Just consider the problems you may get if someone subscribes your email address to illegal content of any kind, whether it is as a bad joke or by accident.

User avatar
PM 2Ring
Posts: 3715
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:19 pm UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby PM 2Ring » Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:23 am UTC

BlitzGirl wrote:
Klear wrote:Yeah, it was. I'm really tired of this happening all the time and tend to snap at people who complain about being filtered, even though doing so does nothing to prevent this from happening in the future (from new people) and all it can accomplish is making a newbie feel less welcome here. I should really just knock it off :oops:

Don't worry - feed squirpies! :wink:


What's a squirpy? :wink:

BlitzGirl wrote:The OTT attracted so many newbies at one point that it ended up being better for our mental health to welcome them rather than get upset at them. If we got irritated at everyone who asked "Have you noticed the Javascript?" or "What's with the title text?" and yes, "Why can't I post links?" we would have been in a bad mood for a long Time!


Those complaints about being filtered can get a bit tedious, especially in these ICT threads, which tend to have a higher newbie ratio than other parts of the fora. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I consider it poor netiquette to start posting in a forum without at least looking at the rules and making some attempt to familiarise oneself with the local culture. But I agree that it's a much better policy to welcome the newbies than to berate them. OTOH, I occasionally point out to them that they are basically admitting that they haven't read the rules (and all the other posts in the thread complaining about being filtered). But I don't do that because I want to play moderator, I do it to save them (and other new readers of the thread) from further embarrassment.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby addams » Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 am UTC

Klear wrote:
addams wrote:
Klear wrote:You seem to be at least fifth person complaining about this issue in this thread. What is it about this topic that attracts the kind of people who don't read the rules after registering?


(...)
It was a snotty post. Another snotty post said, (link) "It would not hurt YOU to read The Rules."

(...)


Yeah, it was. I'm really tired of this happening all the time and tend to snap at people who complain about being filtered, even though doing so does nothing to prevent this from happening in the future (from new people) and all it can accomplish is making a newbie feel less welcome here. I should really just knock it off :oops:

Thank you, Klear;
"We catch more bees with honey than with vinegar."
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=105011
That was something my great grand mother used to say.
Spoiler:
We Never caught bees. Still; Bees are a good thing.


viewtopic.php?f=7&t=84125
For some reason I thought the comic speaks to the issue.

jeeze. Some of our posters seem to Know everything. How.....
Spoiler:
I learned something. I have known it for a long time and I get to relearn it again and again.

You Can't Learn Anything New if You Already Know Every Fucking Thing.

Teachers that know a lot are nice. ("Pass the link to the Rules over this way, again.")
Teachers that know every fucking thing are lying.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
david.windsor
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:08 pm UTC

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby david.windsor » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:53 pm UTC

I used to get email that was for a Mason from the UK. I never corrected them because the emails very strange/interesting. :lol:
"All those ... moments, will be lost ... in time, like tears ... in rain."

User avatar
Monika
Welcoming Aarvark
Posts: 3673
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:03 am UTC
Location: Germany, near Heidelberg
Contact:

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Monika » Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:45 pm UTC

I got an e-mail via some heritage site from a Max Krug that mentioned he is my brother. My former last name was Krug and I have a step-brother with the name Max, so I clicked accept and registered on the site. Then I could see the family tree - and none of the other family member names were familiar. Also most were Polish and that side of my family is not from Poland (and even those who are have German names except for 1 or 2). That Max Krug had confused the e-mail address of his sister.
And then I remembered that in contrast to me and my half-sister our step-brother Max had in fact *not* taken over the last name Krug anyway xD .
#xkcd-q on irc.foonetic.net - the LGBTIQQA support channel
Please donate to help these people

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1279: "Reverse Identity Theft"

Postby Soupspoon » Sun Feb 07, 2016 12:26 am UTC

As this thread has already been necroed from more than two years ago, this February:

My own original [firstname].[lastname]@gmail.com address I rarely used and then forgot about and have long since forgotten the password for (and I'm not sure what secondary address/contact details I gave it; they're probably also useless due to the passage of time and various changes made since). In fact, I couldn't even remember if it had a dot in it, but 'found' that both the dotted and undotted versions had been used when I half-heartedly decided to try creating another. Surprising me (far from a common lastname), until I realised that both were clashing with the single original one, unified target of dos-or-no-dots communications, thus it was my older and more forgetful self that was actually squatting on 'my' address. Ended up not going any further with gmail. At least for that. I have a couple of [pseudonym]@gmail.com accounts that I tie to my various Androids, because that was pretty much forced on me to actually use them, SFAICT.

I like owning my 'own' domain, personally. There's a "[mywholename].me.uk" one, which is useful to give out in the form of "[keyword]@[mywholename.me.uk]", as already mentioned upstream. Keyword relates to the service that I register with, for "who sold what addresses to who?" tracking purposes and filtering and (if I ever find it necessary) unattended /dev/nulling. The disadvantage with the ".me.uk" account is when some webforms check for valid email addresses and still don't (apparently) know that ".me.uk" is (and has been for a while) a valid subset of the .uk ccTLD. I (cheekily) tack on a gTLD to make it ".me.uk.com", or somesuch, when I don't expect communication, although I know I shouldn't (for various reasons, e.g. bothering a potential .uk.com postmaster, in that instance). Surprisingly ".example" or (marginally less surprisingly) ".invalid" sometimes work for that purpose, though.

If it absolutely insists, my 'thrown away' gmail account gets fed to it. If I ever decided I can get back into it I'll probably have to deeply purge it, though. Thus I'm probably not now going to try to resurrect it, and Google's marketing department gets a little extra less-useful-than-it-could-be data.

My first 'own domain', prior to that and now defunct, was a "[username].[ISP].net" domain, because I went for a business-orientated ISP (for other reasons but also) that allowed me to first develop the "[anything]@[username].[ISP].net" plan of filtering.

Not so much these days, and the new own-domain, but I used to find that mails to "[totallyrandom]@<whateverdomainIown>" predominantly featured in amongst the spam, as the spam-engines generated entirely speculative email usernames to aim at. Based on the [itcouldbeanything]@[isp].com plan, I suppose, writ upon randomly chosen domains from single addresses that they might have tried (or been passed on from elsewhere) just the once. The scattergun approach, just for the remote possibility of hitting a new and unknown (and therefore credulous!) target.

That happened a lot with my defunct name.ISP.net domain, which was mostly broadcast (in a readily harvestable manner) via usenet postings (with a single unmangled username that I used for the whole of my Usenet experience). My usenet ID only got the occasional mailing, compared with some registered-for-'interest' deliberately throw-awayable variations which I was eminently glad I had engineered to allow me to auto-filter, although whilst "unmangled@" was quiet, in the spam stakes, I got quite a lot of them to variations like "unmangled017@", "manungled@" and "unmaaaangled@" attempts. For no apparent rhyme or reason, besides some spammergeek having obviously had a 'good idea' of which preprocessors to apply to his permutation engine whilst under the influence of too much Jolt Cola, I presume.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], moody7277 and 52 guests