There's an app for that.....

Markverhyden

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
10,573
Location
Raleigh, NC
Saw an advert for this a couple of days ago. So the next logical, or maybe illogical step, in the mobil device app space goes from finding someone or something you are looking for to having someone tell you live what to do. Onsite consumer work is already at close to break even prices. Don't see how anyone in the US could make a living wage doing this.

 
So I'm visualizing this el' cheapo do-it-yourselfer calling the service and getting one of those highly qualified <insert stereotypical telephone scammer with heavy foreign accent here> electrical experts to walk him through how to wire up his new 240v clothes dryer to his 208v 3-phase service with only the tools his wife keeps in the kitchen drawer. The "expert" has the guy put his wife on and his first question is whether she's paid his life insurance!
 
Last edited:
So I'm visualizing this el cheapo diy'er calling the service and getting one of those highly qualified east-Asian electrical experts to walk him through how to wire up his new 240v clothes dryer to his 208v 3-phase service with only the tools his wife keeps in the kitchen drawer. The "expert" has the guy put his wife on and his first question is whether she's paid his life insurance!
Home owners insurance as well......
 
I would imagine they would limit the scope of DIY. They worded the press release very carefully. So essentially, they can help the homeowner do basic troubleshooting but likely will recommend paid services depending on the issue.

I imagine in many states there will be legal limitations as to what they can do, as certain diagnosis or repairs may from a legal perspective require permits etc.

I do however think this may end up being a massive drain on manpower and money even if you limit free vs paid. This program has the potential to be like that moviepass startup that went bankrupt. You can't get around labor and labor, even cheap labor is never cheap.
 
I would imagine they would limit the scope of DIY. They worded the press release very carefully. So essentially, they can help the homeowner do basic troubleshooting but likely will recommend paid services depending on the issue.

I imagine in many states there will be legal limitations as to what they can do, as certain diagnosis or repairs may from a legal perspective require permits etc.

I do however think this may end up being a massive drain on manpower and money even if you limit free vs paid. This program has the potential to be like that moviepass startup that went bankrupt. You can't get around labor and labor, even cheap labor is never cheap.
In the B(as in Business)-School world, specifically retail, it's called a loss leader. Lure the customer in and them get them to pay $$$$ for the good stuff. But loss leaders rarely lead to huge gains in revenues, profits, etc.

As far as legality? I'm pretty sure in all 50 States a homeowner doesn't have many restrictions on what they can do. Obviously certain things require pulling a permit which then triggers an inspection. Someone giving them advice is just that. Someone giving them advice. BUt, as you mentioned, their legal department was all over that. And you can be sure they are well aware of the State by State statutes.
 
When did casual racism become acceptable here?

I don't honestly think that anyone can consider this observation "casual racism" any more than they can when references are made to the "Nigerian Prince Scam."

The fact is that, at least on our shores, there is a skew toward East Asia when it comes to phone scams. Certainly not exclusively or even close, mind you, but it's common enough it's not racism to make reference to that fact (as it has to do with point of origin, first and foremost) even though a preponderance of the population of East Asia is, indeed, Asian.

I doubt that any of us here believe that the phrase used applies to ALL East Asians, but to a very specific subset. It's part and parcel of a current "whole ball of wax" in the scamming world.
 
I don't honestly think that anyone can consider this observation "casual racism" any more than they can when references are made to the "Nigerian Prince Scam."
I think this is just one of those things we're not going to agree on.

Isn't it odd how people can be more sensitive to out-group intolerance when they're a member of that out-group?
 
@Computer Bloke

You're probably correct about our agreement (or the lack thereof).

But I stand by my assessment (which is indirectly reinforced by @Metanis's comment where he notes he's updated his original post). This really isn't about race, except incidentally.

Being a gay man I am sensitive to out-group intolerance, but much of what my own group considers intolerance, I don't. I have little trouble with stereotypes, either, because anyone who has even the slightest bit of common sense knows that they are caricatures where there is a basis of truth (or they'd vanish, and quickly) but where certain attributes are magnified.

Even "tone of voice" from out-group members (which is difficult to impossible to ferret out in writing) can make the difference between simple observation of actual fact, humor, and hate speech.
 
But I stand by my assessment (which is indirectly reinforced by @Metanis's comment where he notes he's updated his original post). This really isn't about race, except incidentally.
I'm not sure that changing his target from "anyone from East Asia" to "anyone with a heavy foreign accent" is a huge improvement, but I appreciate the effort. Baby steps.

For background, I'm a non-obvious immigrant with a European-looking Chinese wife, an African brother-in-law, another brother-in-law with cerebral palsy (and a Paralympic medal - but I digress), children all over the LGB spectrum, teetotal, vegetarian, atheist, and about eight other acceptable-target minority statuses that I can think of just off the top of my head. As you can imagine, I spend a lot of time keeping a low profile - but that doesn't mean I'm happy about it.

You know how (some) people will glance around the room to check who's listening before telling certain kinds of joke? Just because you can't see us that doesn't mean we're not here.
 
I'm not sure that changing his target from "anyone from East Asia" to "anyone with a heavy foreign accent" is a huge improvement, but I appreciate the effort. Baby steps.

And, yet, you're not getting the central point that what he describes is very widespread and accurate when it comes to "what the scammers sound like" and you're a target in the USA. If we can't agree that accurately describing a situation, which is telling the truth, without landing in "those people" territory is acceptable, then we can't agree.

That's OK, too. I hold no hatred for any "acceptable target" group that I'm aware of. At the same time, if one of those groups happens to compose "a significant number of {insert demographic not related to the fact that they're a target otherwise here}," mentioning that correlation is not, by necessity, targeting them.

I once spent a tortured time (and to the great amusement "the target" coworker) trying to avoid mentioning the race of the one guy in our area who someone was looking for, that was most easily identified when you hit his cubicle based upon his race. He heard me making this effort, and yelled down over the walls, "You know, it's OK to say, 'he's the black guy three rows over,' because I am, and that's the easiest way to get someone to me."
 
Imagine having a standalone droid where the trade can remote into and control it's behaviour to do maintenance etc.

One of the largest scam agencies is run by English and employs only English speaking people based in Malaysia
This is a very interesting documentary, recommended to watch.

 
I'm not sure that changing his target from "anyone from East Asia" to "anyone with a heavy foreign accent" is a huge improvement, but I appreciate the effort. Baby steps.

For background, I'm a non-obvious immigrant with a European-looking Chinese wife, an African brother-in-law, another brother-in-law with cerebral palsy (and a Paralympic medal - but I digress), children all over the LGB spectrum, teetotal, vegetarian, atheist, and about eight other acceptable-target minority statuses that I can think of just off the top of my head. As you can imagine, I spend a lot of time keeping a low profile - but that doesn't mean I'm happy about it.

You know how (some) people will glance around the room to check who's listening before telling certain kinds of joke? Just because you can't see us that doesn't mean we're not here.
There are no acceptable-target minority statuses in this group. Stop being so sensitive. This is (or was) a tech repair forum. Nobody gives two cares what color you are, your sexual orientation, your relationship status, your religion, your diet, or the handicaps of you or your family. Stop throwing around the word racist.

We have probably half a dozen customers a week walk into our store saying they spoke to "Microsoft" gave access to their computer and the guy that spoke very broken Engish, a guy with a heavy accent, hard to understand, etc. demanded a large amount of money from them and locked them out of their computer. That isn't racist. That's people stating facts and experiences. Repeating those experiences and conversations isn't racist, either.

My wife is Hispanic, she says he / she sounds Mexican all the time, but that doesn't make her a racist. Admin, please install the block member plugin. It is long overdue.
 
There are no acceptable-target minority statuses in this group.

That's good to know, and it's mostly been my experience here too.

Stop being so sensitive.

I'm afraid that's probably not going to happen, but I can certainly try to limit my responses here if it'll help.

This is (or was) a tech repair forum.

Um - actually, this is the General Chat forum.

It wasn't my intention to derail the thread and I don't for one moment believe that @Metanis's post was meant to be offensive. It's possible that I'm more aware of what the kids are calling Microaggressions than some people because I see so much of it in Real Life. New Zealand is a lovely place to live but there are still some deeply-embedded traditional attitudes held by its dominant culture and all the minority attributes among my family that I mentioned earlier have been the (recent) subject of misguided "humour", which gets very wearing. I suspect the same might be true elsewhere too.

And, yet, you're not getting the central point that what he describes is very widespread and accurate when it comes to "what the scammers sound like" and you're a target in the USA.

No, I think I understand that quite well. However...

I hold no hatred for any "acceptable target" group that I'm aware of. At the same time, if one of those groups happens to compose "a significant number of {insert demographic not related to the fact that they're a target otherwise here}," mentioning that correlation is not, by necessity, targeting them.

"By necessity" - no. "By implication" - well, maybe. We're into "most X are Y therefore most Y are X" territory here, which goes a long way to explaining why Sikhs have such a great time with airport security.

Around this part of the world most telephone support is done by call centres in India, Malaysia, the Philippines and other relatively low-wage countries which means that often they do speak English with non-native accents; the relevant information is not "people with foreign accents are trying to steal your stuff" but "people who call you out of the blue might be trying to steal your stuff". It's an important distinction and one most easily made by simply skipping the unnecessary adjectives.

But I'm not expecting to change anyone's mind here, so I'll let you have the last word.
 
the relevant information

We differ on what's relevant. In this case, both are, actually. There is a pattern, and noting that pattern is not anything-ist. It's merely accurate.

If you want anything that mentions any demographic quality to apply to all in that demographic, even when there are other qualifiers, that's really not something I'm willing to take on as my responsibility. Scoping rules do apply.
 
Click on the username of any member next to one of their posts and the "Ignore" button is there, and has been there, for as long as I've been here. Use it as you see fit.
Thats an "ignore" as opposed to "Block."
You can still see that they've posted but you dont see the content unless you click "Show ignored content."
I'd like to actually "block" some members so that they don't show up at all.
 
Back
Top