Enlightened blogspam, part II

by on November 26, 2010 at 7:48 am in Economics, Web/Tech | Permalink

Kat sends me this link on CAPTCHA arbitrage.

Stephen Smith points our attention to some examples of quite good economics in blogspam.  My example was here, and that comment attracted a lot of attention from subsequent spammers (some of that has since been erased).  For instance Tiffany1837Jewelry (web site sadly now defunct) reported:

When Google crawls this page, it basically ignores the URL and any links in the the comment text. In order for the spammer to benefit, they have to persuade human readers to follow the link, so contributing meaningful content is perhaps the only way.

Not too shabby.

Savefuel noted:

a spam formed from the fusion of human and machine intelligence….maybe this is part of the evolution of spam. Not sure I am proud to part of that parentage.

The young Stephen Smith, by the way, is the author of the excellent, intelligent, and well-reasoned weblog marketurbanism.com.  He tells me that he is looking for a job in journalism and/or think tank-related activities.  

cdir November 26, 2010 at 5:01 am

Does that plug for Stephen Smith at the end turn this post into recursive meta-spam?

Kat November 26, 2010 at 5:47 am
Leigh Caldwell November 26, 2010 at 7:06 am

The first link is broken (seems to be a piece of HTML embedded and re-encoded within the link HTML itself). The correct address is http://bit-player.org/2010/captcha-arbitrage

That's assuming I can figure out the MR captcha and get this comment posted…or maybe I should just outsource it.

eddie November 26, 2010 at 9:19 pm

Similarly, the comment from Tiffany1837Jewelry was a copy of a comment made earlier by John Stephens.

XKCD's ubiquitously-mentioned comic notwithstanding, I have yet to see any actual worthwhile commentary from a spammer. I have seen a tremendous number copied-and-pasted from other actual commenters and recycled into spam, and an endless variety of vague statements of agreement, appreciation, and flattery.

Of course, we're not at the bottom of the rabbit-hole yet.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: