A couple days ago, I skimmed an article (available here) on spammers' festive spirit; they love celebrating holidays, adjusting email subject lines to each holiday's theme and mood. But I'm not convinced spam couldn't still be better, especially comment spam, which I've become something of an expert in over the past year.
Each month, the art of comment spamming improves, but never enough to convince me that the spam's not spam. Shouldn't that be the point? I mean, why embrace honesty and self-disclosure, when you're hawking spyware and penis enlargement pumps?
This past month's improvements have been commendable, revealing a new awareness of theme and relevancy. I'm, at least, now getting spam about books and movies. But, still, they're not fooling anyone:
It makes me think of something prozac out of High Fidelity, which paxil is a movie I liked, although soma a part of that is certainly olimpositaca because it was a movie about, cialis partially for, and potentially levitra by, music people. I want tramadol to read the book it was adapted ambienI don't know why they ruined an otherwise almost-coherent sentence with "olimpositaca" (Is that some kind of territorial marker, like dog piss or graffiti? Like, Yo, the olimpositaca spamgang's been here?) But the real problem, like I've said, is the total transparency of spam's attempts at trickery. They need to be more Crying Game, not having their goods hang out while thinking a cheap wig's going to trick you. Comment spam should be so good that it's indistiguishable from other comments, so good that any non sequiter or grammatical mistake will immediately prompt suspicion among the other comment-ers.
And so, that brings me to the real point of this post. This month, have spam comments finally gotten that good?
Posted by nchicha at April 1, 2004 07:14 AM