We created a fake delivery company to get a job(blog.kashevko.com)
blog.kashevko.com
We created a fake delivery company to get a job
https://blog.kashevko.com/we-created-a-fake-delivery-company-3/
138 comments
But they're are literally trying to get jobs at evil marketing companies, surely they need to out-evil them to break into that industry?
Red teaming evil marketing companies sounds like a good time actually
I have mixed feelings here. On one hand, I am kinda glad marketing companies got targeted, because they deserve some taste of their own medicine. On the other hand, if being creepy is what it takes to get a job here, it's that literally selecting for creepy? That means only people with a particular mindset get to work there - which kinda makes the problem even worse?
> disregard for the dead
They didn't disregard them: they tried to target them with ads.
What higher form of acknowledgement is there in our modern world?
They didn't disregard them: they tried to target them with ads.
What higher form of acknowledgement is there in our modern world?
Agreed. As I read this, "stupid influencer prank" is what comes to mind.
And those, too, are a plague of sorts. I genuinely am at a point where I tense when I see anyone approaching with a camera up.
press charges over what.
Is impersonating someone and literally cyber stalking people legal in your jurisdiction?
is creating deepfakes legal? at the moment, yes. they’re using it in an obvious parody manner, so the “impersonation” claim is a stretch at best.
is “cyber stalking” legal? doing research using publicly available information is quite legal. stalking tends imply you’re harassing or intimidating someone, that doesn’t seem to apply here. conde nast told them to go away, and they did.
so, yes, i ask again: press charges over what? someone being uncomfortable or intellectually intimidated isn’t a crime.
is “cyber stalking” legal? doing research using publicly available information is quite legal. stalking tends imply you’re harassing or intimidating someone, that doesn’t seem to apply here. conde nast told them to go away, and they did.
so, yes, i ask again: press charges over what? someone being uncomfortable or intellectually intimidated isn’t a crime.
Without HOA boards, people would have landscaping that doesn't match their neighbors. It'd be anarchy!
[deleted]
"impersonating" - creating a video using their likeness and only sending it to that person doesn't actually count as impersonating.
"Literally cyber stalking" - sending them an ad. If this is illegal then linkedin would also be party to the crime, I'm guessing their lawyers have checked this.
This all is creepy AF but I'm fairly certain it's all legal (in US)
"Literally cyber stalking" - sending them an ad. If this is illegal then linkedin would also be party to the crime, I'm guessing their lawyers have checked this.
This all is creepy AF but I'm fairly certain it's all legal (in US)
As long as they’re doing it to business people and marketing employees I’m fine with it. Most of them absolutely deserve some of their own medicine.
I dont think two wrongs make a right.
We accept it when rich marketers spy on and manipulate the public. I think if we’re going to ignore that, then there’s no reason to care when they’re targeted. If all of the sudden we start caring about the spying, then fine let’s direct concern towards spying on marketers too, but right now it’s hypocritical.
Creative solution to a problem they had - no job and apparently only a backpack to their name, but the story quickly fell appart when I realised that they bought delivery robots, laser engravers, clothing, seals, double digit ipads, etc. Clearly they are loaded and just trying to downplay their invasion of privacy and perhaps downright illegal cloning of voice and appearance to get a job. Good job on that one company calling them out.
Agree, I got some anxiety thinking of the security implications of being handed an ipad of unknown source.
We are slowly getting to a place where people realize a USB-drive found in the parking lot should be met with suspicion. But target one of the higher-ups with an ipad didn't raise eyebrows? (maybe it did, hope so)
We are slowly getting to a place where people realize a USB-drive found in the parking lot should be met with suspicion. But target one of the higher-ups with an ipad didn't raise eyebrows? (maybe it did, hope so)
This is everything I hate about the internet in one story. Using ads to target people, using AI to clone someones' voice and identity, dogs. The person who said they were excited, confused, scared but curious sums up how I feel about this although I'm not curious because I know where it leads.
I already find it disturbing enough that I'm getting targeted by all those run-of-the-mill AI entrpreneurs matching the ML part of my job title and auto-generating my work email in order to try to sell me their barely strung together ChatGPT wrappers because they were "impressed by my AI experience" (I have none). If I got physical advertisement material using my likeness and delivered in person, I would straight up call the police on whoever brought me that.
I agree. It's an invasion of privacy dressed up as a cute story.
I think we can all agree about the evil of the adtech ecosystem. But what do you have against dogs?
[deleted]
Exactly. All because they want a "job." which just rewards this sort of behavior.
They need a job because they are fleeing a war they didn't ask for and are trying to get back on their feet. I don't blame them for doing it. I just don't like it.
There are other jobs that don't require being gross.
In this economy? I don't know anymore.
And yet they spent thousands on this prank. There is shortage of people able to work or fight in Ukraine, the country is fighting for survival and these two are busy spending thousands of euro on creepy shit.
You're free to donate money to Ukraine yourself. They didn't ask to be born there or to be in that situation.
I live in a country with hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees just living their new lives, working - and spending the money, sometimes a lot of it for expensive apartments, nice cars, luxury meals etc. Are all of them bad just because they don't want to be responsible for the state when they didn't sign up for that and nobody paid them to do so? I really don't think so. They are people like you and me, they want to live a happy life. Some contribute to the defense effort, some don't, both is fine.
I live in a country with hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees just living their new lives, working - and spending the money, sometimes a lot of it for expensive apartments, nice cars, luxury meals etc. Are all of them bad just because they don't want to be responsible for the state when they didn't sign up for that and nobody paid them to do so? I really don't think so. They are people like you and me, they want to live a happy life. Some contribute to the defense effort, some don't, both is fine.
I do donate. I do not expect them to be patriots and go die in a trench, but I also expect them to not be creeps and dickheads abroad. Their behaviour and narration presents a couple of cash-rich, entitled people detached from reality. They are not helping their own cause.
Are they trying to help any cause other than their own? Also - don't generalize based on nationality, please. These behave like this, others behave differently. This changes nothing about the war in Ukraine or Ukrainians.
They are refugees. They are not entitled to the same quality of life as they enjoyed in their own country. Nobody says they can't have it, but trying to maintain it by using digital footprints of 299 deceased people and stalking living persons while spending a lot of cash on toys is not going to help them last long in the UK. They need to accept what is obvious--they are refugees and may have to adjust their own expectations for a while. It helps to have friends when you are a refugee, but so far they upset people and have a permanent record on the internet linking their name with this idiotic stunt.
They are people. They are entitled to everything every other human is entitled to. Including being idiots.
To be fair, they acknowledge they are being creepy and that not all reactions were positive.
Also, of all the shady hustling that I’ve seen, targeting high level employees with a creative-and-privacy-invading pitch seems the least problematic.
Also, of all the shady hustling that I’ve seen, targeting high level employees with a creative-and-privacy-invading pitch seems the least problematic.
Well, it's certainly creative. Which is probably a good thing if you're running a marketing company like these guys are, especially given how packed the field is right now.
But to say it was a risky move would be the understatement of the century. Delivering mail to companies that didn't ask for it, and in person? Using dead people to advertise? AI created deepfakes of the people targeted as a persuasion tactic? This could have easily gone very poorly for you, and lead to all sorts of criminal charges. Remember, we're in a world where a few glowing lights for a TV show ad caused a bomb scare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Boston_Mooninite_panic
Where harmless packages caused buildings to get evacuated, and Facebook had to change its ad settings because people were using it to target specific individuals.
The fact only one company sent a cease and desist, and no one got scared enough to get the police involved was probably a miraculous stroke of luck. So, points for creativity, though you got incredibly lucky the end result was so positive here.
But to say it was a risky move would be the understatement of the century. Delivering mail to companies that didn't ask for it, and in person? Using dead people to advertise? AI created deepfakes of the people targeted as a persuasion tactic? This could have easily gone very poorly for you, and lead to all sorts of criminal charges. Remember, we're in a world where a few glowing lights for a TV show ad caused a bomb scare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Boston_Mooninite_panic
Where harmless packages caused buildings to get evacuated, and Facebook had to change its ad settings because people were using it to target specific individuals.
The fact only one company sent a cease and desist, and no one got scared enough to get the police involved was probably a miraculous stroke of luck. So, points for creativity, though you got incredibly lucky the end result was so positive here.
I have a hunch that one of the reasons it may have worked where it did is because they tapped very quickly into the ego of the executive they were targetting. Even the outside of box came with a picture with their (nicely stylized) face on it, which I wonder might have flattered and disarmed more than it should have.
Then inside, more personalized photos to keep them engaged.
Move the focus away from the individual to some brand message and I think the outcome could have been much more like you suggest.
In that sense, this is more a demonstration as to the effectiveness of social engineering than anything marketing related.
Then inside, more personalized photos to keep them engaged.
Move the focus away from the individual to some brand message and I think the outcome could have been much more like you suggest.
In that sense, this is more a demonstration as to the effectiveness of social engineering than anything marketing related.
Isn't most marketing basically social engineering, but on a wider scale?
Yes i suppose it is. Good point! But there's something very personal about their approach that couldn't scale to a wider audience, almost by definition. When you present something to even a precise demographic, but an anonymous one, you are in some sense still presenting something to the market. When you do the same but target a specific individual you're no longer addressing the market. I'd say that has more parallels with hacking than marketing.
It's simply goodheart's law taken to the nth degree.
- People see that LinkedIn meme of some college student sneaking into a company o deliver pizza and attaching their resume to stand out
- People praise its creativity
- Someone desperate enough falls into Poe's law and tries to +1 that.
Maybe companies should properly utilize their "boring" pipeline if they don't want candidates to start getting "creative".
- People see that LinkedIn meme of some college student sneaking into a company o deliver pizza and attaching their resume to stand out
- People praise its creativity
- Someone desperate enough falls into Poe's law and tries to +1 that.
Maybe companies should properly utilize their "boring" pipeline if they don't want candidates to start getting "creative".
The “fake delivery” trick is so old it’s in a 1950s Donald Duck comic.
What’s going to happen is something like this admittedly well-executed version goes viral, and then you get fifty thousand incredibly crappy imitations.
What’s going to happen is something like this admittedly well-executed version goes viral, and then you get fifty thousand incredibly crappy imitations.
Old tricks with a new generation of dogs. Novelty comes in waves just like any other trend, and we have new technologies to work with as well. And yes, it's all in execution. Apple shows how you don't need to be first, just the first to do it really well.
>goes viral, and then you get fifty thousand incredibly crappy imitations.
Very likely, yes. But you only really to do it once if you're the one trying to get a job. You're not responsible for any imitations
>goes viral, and then you get fifty thousand incredibly crappy imitations.
Very likely, yes. But you only really to do it once if you're the one trying to get a job. You're not responsible for any imitations
>It hit me. What if we use the ''custom audiences'' thingy, but just populate it with 299 deceased people and 1 person whom we really need to show this ad to?
What a sentence. And what an article, too: using the deceased as a marketing ploy, sending cryptic emails, AI + voice impersonation. I'm surprised they only got one cease and desist letter at the end. I wonder if this is the endgame of social mobility as more and more humans become replaced through automation: a competition for the attention of those at the top.
What a sentence. And what an article, too: using the deceased as a marketing ploy, sending cryptic emails, AI + voice impersonation. I'm surprised they only got one cease and desist letter at the end. I wonder if this is the endgame of social mobility as more and more humans become replaced through automation: a competition for the attention of those at the top.
> I wonder if this is the endgame of social mobility as more and more humans become replaced through automation: a competition for the attention of those at the top.
I think in general, the creative industry has always been one that fascinates people, that's its purpose in the end. This naturally motivates people to want to work in it, creating a large supply for a small demand of jobs. As a result, entering the industry is extremely difficult. It doesn't end at getting the job though, people in the creative industry are often extremely overworked.
On your other point, I agree that with the increase of AI there will be very negative impacts on social mobility:
* human labour will be increasingly worthless as robots get cheaper and more capable. It will only survive in a few niches where it gives sentimental value (humans are the new horses, cgp grey had a great video about this). so both skill and hard work won't be valued as much any more as they are valued right now.
* AI also gives better tools to the rich to protect their assets. With increased AI, there is less people required for society to function any more. The poor aren't driving the trains any more, nor are they shooting the guns, or running the steel mills. They can turn these tools less and less against the property owning class if they feel sufficiently dissatisfied.
* AI creates tremendous wealth and it's easy to make the poor feel wealthier just by giving them some of the crumbles, while giving 99% of the new wealth to the top 0.1%. Revolutions happen when people are hungry. When you satisfy their basic needs, then people care less about these issues. Yes, in the future, the bottom 99% might even be happy, but they might have increasingly small chunks of the new wealth.
I think in general, the creative industry has always been one that fascinates people, that's its purpose in the end. This naturally motivates people to want to work in it, creating a large supply for a small demand of jobs. As a result, entering the industry is extremely difficult. It doesn't end at getting the job though, people in the creative industry are often extremely overworked.
On your other point, I agree that with the increase of AI there will be very negative impacts on social mobility:
* human labour will be increasingly worthless as robots get cheaper and more capable. It will only survive in a few niches where it gives sentimental value (humans are the new horses, cgp grey had a great video about this). so both skill and hard work won't be valued as much any more as they are valued right now.
* AI also gives better tools to the rich to protect their assets. With increased AI, there is less people required for society to function any more. The poor aren't driving the trains any more, nor are they shooting the guns, or running the steel mills. They can turn these tools less and less against the property owning class if they feel sufficiently dissatisfied.
* AI creates tremendous wealth and it's easy to make the poor feel wealthier just by giving them some of the crumbles, while giving 99% of the new wealth to the top 0.1%. Revolutions happen when people are hungry. When you satisfy their basic needs, then people care less about these issues. Yes, in the future, the bottom 99% might even be happy, but they might have increasingly small chunks of the new wealth.
> but they might have increasingly small chunks of the new wealth.
which is fine if they weren't party to that wealth's creation via investments and taking on the risks.
which is fine if they weren't party to that wealth's creation via investments and taking on the risks.
Sorry, but AI wealth creation is based on mass theft of intellectual property created by others. The only risk is getting caught and that's taken care of my clever marketing.
They read our emails, track our presence in the web, know what we buy online and even listen our conversations so that they can sell us stuff we don’t need. That bothers me more than what this fake company did.
And by “they” I mean big corporations in coalition with ad companies.
And by “they” I mean big corporations in coalition with ad companies.
This line gave me pause. I was like, "Hunh? No way...they didn't seriously. Wait what? Oh shit wow...that worked?! Ehhhh~"
Impressive but yuck (personally).
If nothing else, they've proven they know how to think outside the sphere. I found it funny that Conde Nast sent a C&D.
Impressive but yuck (personally).
If nothing else, they've proven they know how to think outside the sphere. I found it funny that Conde Nast sent a C&D.
> Imagine one day randomly finding yourself in a foreign country thousands of kilometres away from home. Your own country is suddenly at war, and all you have is a backpack hanging off your back.
Well, a backpack and thousands of Euros to spend on robotic dogs, tablets, pen plotters, holographic envelopes, etc.
The cynic in me tells me those CEOs are not the only ones being sold a fairytale, specially considering how proud they are of how far they'll go to get eyeballs.
Well, a backpack and thousands of Euros to spend on robotic dogs, tablets, pen plotters, holographic envelopes, etc.
The cynic in me tells me those CEOs are not the only ones being sold a fairytale, specially considering how proud they are of how far they'll go to get eyeballs.
It's not like your bank account immediately stops working when you cross the border. There are people who had successful careers finding themselves in this situation, is their story not valid just because they also weren't completely broke? It's not actionable advice (is this even advice?) for someone with zero on their bank account, but why should it?
Saying you have nothing but a backpack, when in fact you have a backpack and tens of thousands of dollars is lying. This whole thing is a ton of lying for their own personal benefit.
It's pretty obvious they meant the material possessions. Isn't it in guidelines to look for the more charitable options?
I mean it says they lied in the opening.
This is really cool, but the narrative also has a few strong "Wait this is creepy" moments... There is a lot of creating problem solving and some awesome creations sprinkled in. But damn would I both love and hate to get one of those deliveries.
They cloned people with AI tools and created a bunch of deep-fakes which they then delivered to that person.
They used a (self made) list of dead people to improve targeted ads so they could cohort-advertise to a small list of people.
They created fake uniforms to deliver packages to offices, and seemed pretty successful.
I feel like this would make a great case study on targeted phishing and social-engineering.
They cloned people with AI tools and created a bunch of deep-fakes which they then delivered to that person.
They used a (self made) list of dead people to improve targeted ads so they could cohort-advertise to a small list of people.
They created fake uniforms to deliver packages to offices, and seemed pretty successful.
I feel like this would make a great case study on targeted phishing and social-engineering.
Most people from Western Europe couldn't afford to just go to London like that and waste time and money in this way. I am much more curious about the state of these people's company's financials than anything else.
Also, elaborately targeting specific people like that and presenting them with the fact that you can fake their voice on top of any kind of outrages statements while you know exactly where they work and how to get there sets a hellish precedent and I'd even consider it a veiled attempt at a threat.
It is not what I'd consider culturally appropriate behavior in the UK, business-wise. I'd try to adapt, if at all possible, to the new environment you've found yourselves in unwillingly.
Also, elaborately targeting specific people like that and presenting them with the fact that you can fake their voice on top of any kind of outrages statements while you know exactly where they work and how to get there sets a hellish precedent and I'd even consider it a veiled attempt at a threat.
It is not what I'd consider culturally appropriate behavior in the UK, business-wise. I'd try to adapt, if at all possible, to the new environment you've found yourselves in unwillingly.
They were living a comfortable life in a cheap country, and found themselves looking for a way to do the same job in a way more expensive city when their country was attacked and at war. I found their targeting strategy and "product" extremely creepy, but I am willing to give them a pass given the circumstances.
The war affects all of us in Europe, either directly or indirectly. Ukraine needs people and they legged it when the going got tough. Now they expect to win prizes playing shit games.
Very interesting, very impressive, and a little concerning that this is what it takes to get noticed! I actually went in expecting something along the lines of "I started a profitable company in order to pad my resume and get some interviews; it worked, so now I can shut the company down."
I have a couple of fake Linkedin profiles that look very attractive to tech recruiters. I always answer to offers like “Thanks, but no. BtW I would recommend <my-profile-here>“ (I don’t write exactly this, but something that sounds more natural and trustworthy)
It doesn’t work wonders, but helps.
It doesn’t work wonders, but helps.
> a little concerning that this is what it takes to get noticed
It's not. Otherwise everyone would have to do it.
It's not. Otherwise everyone would have to do it.
What if work isn't scarce so companies can get all workforce they need without considering most people then not everyone has to and it's still true.
Sorry I didn't understand that. What's still true? Why would work not being scarce mean that there are loads of people available for jobs?
I'm sorry. I meant "what if work is scarce". That is, that's there more people than work.
Oh - I see! If work were scarce then yes, that would mean employers can be more selective. This is a good reason to ensure it's easy and attractive to build businesses. Competition is good for employees and customers.
However, my main point is that just because one person did this and got noticed, that's not the same as the thing they did being what you need to do to get noticed.
However, my main point is that just because one person did this and got noticed, that's not the same as the thing they did being what you need to do to get noticed.
Well, they seem to have put hundreds of hours of work into this ill-advised stunt and only got a two month contract out of it (whilst potentially burning bridges with some of their ideal employers). I would hardly read it as a success story.
What are they actually selling? Their website, https://www.outstandly.com/, is a single landing page with "Creative solutions for boring problems."
Here is a boring problem, creatively show me your work.
Here is a boring problem, creatively show me your work.
Sounds like they are in creative/digital marketing space so this makes sense from that perspective- ie not the right tactic for a Java outsourcing company..
Seems like their gamedev website shows more of their work:
https://gamedev.outstandly.com/gamedev/
Feels a lot less boring too.
https://gamedev.outstandly.com/gamedev/
Feels a lot less boring too.
Since this is on HN, I walked into this half-expecting the story to be about some backend dev who's been out of work so long that they created a fake company for their LinkedIn profile to meet the requisite "5 years of X", where X is the most popular PL searched for in their locale's LinkedIn.
This is much, much more interesting than that! Nice work.
This is much, much more interesting than that! Nice work.
Random idea based on article:
I'd love to see a future Sci-fi TV episode where a character gets not one, but multiple such "from the future gift boxes with video messages from a future self" -- but from multiple future selves, that is, multiple future parallel universe versions of the character!
In other words, "here is a set of potential future you's -- along with the instructions to activate them -- important upcoming life decisions to make or not to make, depending on the desired outcome..."
And what would make it really interesting (as the plot unfolds!)... is that all of these apparently disparate sets of decisions -- are actually intertwined, entangled, and potentially mutually contradictory (i.e., choosing one set unchooses all of the others!)
Now, for extra points, for the future SF writer or writers working on this -- make it so that the main character, after discovering the "either-or" mutual exclusion principle inherent in these choices -- tries to somehow cheat fate and destiny by attempting to somehow obtain ALL of them at the same time!
Will the character be successful in his quest against the apparent exclusivity of fate?
Or will he somehow manage to attain all of these future possibilities, all at the same time?
Well, that's the episode plot for this future TV Sci-Fi episode and/or movie (should it ever be written!)
Anyway, interesting article!
I'd love to see a future Sci-fi TV episode where a character gets not one, but multiple such "from the future gift boxes with video messages from a future self" -- but from multiple future selves, that is, multiple future parallel universe versions of the character!
In other words, "here is a set of potential future you's -- along with the instructions to activate them -- important upcoming life decisions to make or not to make, depending on the desired outcome..."
And what would make it really interesting (as the plot unfolds!)... is that all of these apparently disparate sets of decisions -- are actually intertwined, entangled, and potentially mutually contradictory (i.e., choosing one set unchooses all of the others!)
Now, for extra points, for the future SF writer or writers working on this -- make it so that the main character, after discovering the "either-or" mutual exclusion principle inherent in these choices -- tries to somehow cheat fate and destiny by attempting to somehow obtain ALL of them at the same time!
Will the character be successful in his quest against the apparent exclusivity of fate?
Or will he somehow manage to attain all of these future possibilities, all at the same time?
Well, that's the episode plot for this future TV Sci-Fi episode and/or movie (should it ever be written!)
Anyway, interesting article!
I could see this as 6 episode seasons and each episode comes with 2 boxes detailing potential outcomes, the first episode boxes cover the next week, the second cover the next month, then 6 months, a year, 5 years, and all the way to retirement.
After episode 5 which shows the MC having achieved an outcome they are happy with, episode 6 starts with a new person who gets an episode almost all to their self.
However, the first person finds them when back when they were on choice 2 (in Episode 2), and realizing that they are not the only person getting these choice boxes causes the original experiment that we saw to go off the rails. (Events in time can be changed after the fact, after all, the fundamental system the whole story runs on is time travel).
That queues up your idea of attempting to cheat fate and somehow obtain all of the potential futures with their #2 while also dealing with other people given choice boxes.
It allows the story to address all sorts of questions like, who is sending the boxes, what is the purpose of the boxes being sent, and what is the final goal once all of the time travel fuckery settles down?
Call it the Double Slit Experiment, maybe?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
After episode 5 which shows the MC having achieved an outcome they are happy with, episode 6 starts with a new person who gets an episode almost all to their self.
However, the first person finds them when back when they were on choice 2 (in Episode 2), and realizing that they are not the only person getting these choice boxes causes the original experiment that we saw to go off the rails. (Events in time can be changed after the fact, after all, the fundamental system the whole story runs on is time travel).
That queues up your idea of attempting to cheat fate and somehow obtain all of the potential futures with their #2 while also dealing with other people given choice boxes.
It allows the story to address all sorts of questions like, who is sending the boxes, what is the purpose of the boxes being sent, and what is the final goal once all of the time travel fuckery settles down?
Call it the Double Slit Experiment, maybe?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
If you haven't already seen, give the Netflix Show "Dark" a watch: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5753856/
I LOVE THIS CONCEPT SO MUCH
I went on AliExpress to look up how much robot dogs cost, and after filtering out the ones that are obviously plastic toys, the ones that look like the photos they posted were thousands of dollars.
Seems like a weird priority for a project like this.
Seems like a weird priority for a project like this.
Using marketing tricks to get a job in marketing seems like a full equivalent of a hacking of security services provider to get hired as a security expert. I suppose most HN visitors would assume the former to be ok as long as nobody harmed? Why so many commentators feel upset about the story then?
P.S. Though I do not like an attempt to pose as poor nobodies while they obviously could afford spending money on iPads to give away
P.S. Though I do not like an attempt to pose as poor nobodies while they obviously could afford spending money on iPads to give away
We needed only a couple of used old iPads from the marketplaces.
It's later that we learned majority of these companies have ''no valuable gifts'' policy where they must return things like these, so we just kept reusing the returned ones.
For those of you pointing out the (obvious to some of us) problems with this approach, all I can say… having occasionally crossed paths (and done work with) the cutting edge of creative industries in London… this kind of extreme quirky/subversive/unorthodox pushing of the envelope is exactly the kind of thing they hire for and do every day. The advertising campaigns you experience yourselves, the ones that make it to mainstream B2C and B2B, are merely the tip of the iceberg. Under the surface (the extremely targeted campaigns you never hear of because you are not the intended audience) you’ve got all kinds of what you would think of as “dirty tricks” going on, and most of the time it works too.
What an awesome story. The amount of effort put in is nuts!
Also, LOL at Condé Nast. How on brand of them to C&D you!
Also, LOL at Condé Nast. How on brand of them to C&D you!
haha, thank you!
C&D included wording ''we appreciate creativity''.
But I hold no grudge. I don't know what was going on in the life of that person, maybe they had some creepy stalkers in the past who really caused them problems or maybe it even didn't get to them and this is just a standard procedure of their security team.
But I hold no grudge. I don't know what was going on in the life of that person, maybe they had some creepy stalkers in the past who really caused them problems or maybe it even didn't get to them and this is just a standard procedure of their security team.
While this is pretty cool, I feel like I must echo the sentiment here and also say that this is pretty creepy. I am fine with the "using dead people profiles to improve specificity of online ads" but the deepfakes part is very creepy. I am quite sure at least some of the targets would have started to doubt whether this is fake or real at some point. Imagine doing this on someone with the intention of radicalizing them. You can easily send messages like "The LBGTQ movement started out good. It even helped society a lot. But then it got overtaken by more and more inclusion. We came to realise that tolerance and inclusion just isn't something humans can do long term but by the time we did, it was too late. You need to do the right thing. Don't support them."
The part where they can just buy uniforms and go into an office to make a delivery sounds like very lax security with not much that can be done to fight against it.
The part where they can just buy uniforms and go into an office to make a delivery sounds like very lax security with not much that can be done to fight against it.
Aren’t the “uniforms” just high-viz vests though?
creepy, reminds me of the webpage someone made years ago that shows a stalker looking through all the personal information and friend lists of the user visiting the page
Many of us found themselves trying their luck in London. They don't seem to financially need it, looking at the expenses.
This site breaks Brave on Android. The page becomee slow, goes to "Oh Snap" in seconds and finally Brave gets terminated.
The same thing happened to me. Escalating levels of non-response from my system, starting with the browser slowing down and culminating in Process Control stopping. I think it may have to do with uBlock Origin, which is default in Brave: on desktop (Edge with uBlock), it quickly spawns hundreds and hundreds of blocked POST calls to litix.io, an analytics website. These seem to be coming from the video player, which is constantly trying to beacon information back home. The site hovers around 10% of CPU on my desktop and I have to keep reloading it to poke around the devtools.
I would suggest making the analytics less aggressive and adding some kind of error catching so that it doesn't attempt to send data hundreds and hundreds of times.
I would suggest making the analytics less aggressive and adding some kind of error catching so that it doesn't attempt to send data hundreds and hundreds of times.
I’m on plain vanilla Mobile Safari with no content blockers and the site gets unusable as you scroll down through the videos. My device is also now hot enough to melt the sun, too.
Incredibile that this has been down voted :) It was meant as helping OP, not criticizing his work. Or is Brave Browser the problem?
Sorry about this! It's a simple Ghost blog, but the post has lots of video and photo, that must be clogging the resources probably :(
Looks like a javascript thing to me (maybe the interaction between the site and Brave's ad blocker?)
In Firefox on Android, I only get one image.
Firefox, Android, uBlock Origin, JavScript off, I believe I see it all. (text, images, ect)
I have to say man.. as I read this stuff I can't but help to understand why Bill Hicks, Douglas Adams and many others talk about marketing the way do. I found myself repulsed, because I am absolutely willing to believe that this is not an isolated frame of mind.
I will say one nice thing. There is a level of whimsy to the idea, but good grief the execution of it is a violation of everything I consider appropriate. But then. as my marketing prof once said, marketing lives on the greyish side of legal. Moral is not even a thing.
I will say one nice thing. There is a level of whimsy to the idea, but good grief the execution of it is a violation of everything I consider appropriate. But then. as my marketing prof once said, marketing lives on the greyish side of legal. Moral is not even a thing.
I’m on the “pro” side of the vigorous debate here — this is charming, hilarious and creative. The marketing ‘targets’ are all by and large public figures, the ego ploy to get to them seems to have been generally received as intended, … how could you not at least look at these two for creative work / guerilla marketing / some super cool campaign?
High level marketing thinkers all understand that they are playing in the field of human manipulation; some campaigns / ideas are transgressive, some are transgressive merely for the time they are in, some push the boundaries and lose. From the results here, this pushed the boundaries and won.
To me the mild lean-in on creepiness throughout, including some of the ai videos just says ‘creative geniuses’ - they set up a full campaign that benefits from limits of current tech, and got themselves a contract at Saatchi, in a country that’s famously rigorous and bounded in terms of class restrictions.
Nice work guys, keep coming up with cool hacks and good luck in your business.
High level marketing thinkers all understand that they are playing in the field of human manipulation; some campaigns / ideas are transgressive, some are transgressive merely for the time they are in, some push the boundaries and lose. From the results here, this pushed the boundaries and won.
To me the mild lean-in on creepiness throughout, including some of the ai videos just says ‘creative geniuses’ - they set up a full campaign that benefits from limits of current tech, and got themselves a contract at Saatchi, in a country that’s famously rigorous and bounded in terms of class restrictions.
Nice work guys, keep coming up with cool hacks and good luck in your business.
Thank you so much!
Really appreciate your kind words among a fair bit of not so kind comments in this thread.
> Designing a fake delivery company seemed to be the most logical, straightforward way of contacting a person.
That does not sound logical or straightforward to me at all.
> To keep the intrigue going, we resorted to just sending cryptic emails to everyone a couple of days before the delivery
So, they’re spammers? And physical spam too?
This post reads as rather unethical to me… I wouldn’t want to work with them.
That does not sound logical or straightforward to me at all.
> To keep the intrigue going, we resorted to just sending cryptic emails to everyone a couple of days before the delivery
So, they’re spammers? And physical spam too?
This post reads as rather unethical to me… I wouldn’t want to work with them.
Nice. I also really, really love the visual execution of your blog post. Of course, not every article i read should copy this, but here it seems to be perfect.
I envisioned a similar look for some video shots from my office. I know, lighting setup is key here, but which camera did you use?
Specifically the gif / video-loop with for "waiting".
Really well done everything.
I envisioned a similar look for some video shots from my office. I know, lighting setup is key here, but which camera did you use?
Specifically the gif / video-loop with for "waiting".
Really well done everything.
Thank you so much!
It's Nikon Z7 ii, but if I'd be picking a camera today I wouldn't take this one.
The big selling point of this camera for me when it just came out was a generous 45.7 MP sensor that meant I have a decent freedom for cropping stuff or printing my works on billboards (never happened) if I ever need to.
But now all the AI upscalers like the ones from the Topaz Lab disrupted the market and it's no longer an advantage really. It's still a great camera for pictures, don't take me wrong!
But if I'd be in the market for a video camera, I'd be looking at cameras from Black Magic or RED. They give you a cinematic look and actually have a proper RAW video file format for color grading.
If you want to achieve a similar look, here is a small lifehack we've used for most of the videos: smoke machine. You can get one off Amazon for like $50. It creates this cool deepness and light diffusion in the atmosphere. Just need to play around a bit with the distances between smoke and subjects, intensity and lights.
The big selling point of this camera for me when it just came out was a generous 45.7 MP sensor that meant I have a decent freedom for cropping stuff or printing my works on billboards (never happened) if I ever need to.
But now all the AI upscalers like the ones from the Topaz Lab disrupted the market and it's no longer an advantage really. It's still a great camera for pictures, don't take me wrong!
But if I'd be in the market for a video camera, I'd be looking at cameras from Black Magic or RED. They give you a cinematic look and actually have a proper RAW video file format for color grading.
If you want to achieve a similar look, here is a small lifehack we've used for most of the videos: smoke machine. You can get one off Amazon for like $50. It creates this cool deepness and light diffusion in the atmosphere. Just need to play around a bit with the distances between smoke and subjects, intensity and lights.
Thanks for the reply. Back in the day when i was more into actually making videos, i dreamed of a red or blackmagic.
But i was kind of hoping you were using a much cheaper cam & that the cheap cameras just became much better. Even the nikon is out of my price range for this project. Just wanted something ok, fiddle with the lighting & have it mounted on the ceiling to film a few hours during a few days. In case you got another tip for me other than a gopro.
But thank you. Also thanks for telling me about topaz labs. Looks interesting & haven't heard about them at all before.
But i was kind of hoping you were using a much cheaper cam & that the cheap cameras just became much better. Even the nikon is out of my price range for this project. Just wanted something ok, fiddle with the lighting & have it mounted on the ceiling to film a few hours during a few days. In case you got another tip for me other than a gopro.
But thank you. Also thanks for telling me about topaz labs. Looks interesting & haven't heard about them at all before.
You might be able to get something like a used Blackmagic Design Pocket 4K in mid-hundreds, hopefully.
If you're looking closer at low hundreds, perhaps some great Sony camera can be found on the marketplaces?
Or generally any DLSR for that matter, really.
Or generally any DLSR for that matter, really.
This may be a bit of a cultural impedance mismatch. I can sort of understand their position and sympathize with their situation, but it also seems creepy if I put myself in the shoes of their delivery targets.
Why does the website have a scroll bar? My browser’s window already has one.
> We needed a job, a contract, a windfall!
Nope. You need to learn how to use money and find a way to spend less than you make. You had it good while you could count on arbitrage and you want to keep the gig going. Magically, the first thing that comes to mind is to you fuck around with robots, AI, and deceased people's pasts while your countrymen and women are dying fighting Russians. Grow up.
Nope. You need to learn how to use money and find a way to spend less than you make. You had it good while you could count on arbitrage and you want to keep the gig going. Magically, the first thing that comes to mind is to you fuck around with robots, AI, and deceased people's pasts while your countrymen and women are dying fighting Russians. Grow up.
Bravo. After all this and using the tool what are some takeaways on ai and how it will disrupt (or not) these very same companies?
Thank you.
Lots of them already using AI for all kinds of tasks.
I think it's just important to stay practical as lots of companies slap ''magic AI'' on everything, where it doesn't always makes any sense. Similar to a period when everyone was building everything on a ''blockchain'' because it was ''cool'' and could have given you funding, although the reason for your ''groundbreaking todo app'' to be built on blockchain was... none.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Very very impressive! Lots of success coming their way if they keep going!
I feel a weird level of repulsion that this approach is not only, apparently, rewarded, but also considered advantage in our society that will result in future success. I have long wept for our future and this is likely a reminder of why we fail as a species.
A majority of humans alive 500 years ago would have murdered you on the spot as a demon if they saw you use cars, planes, microwaves, etc modern technology.
You'll come around to generated content as you get more accustomed to it. It is quite powerful and not terribly difficult to use if you spend a bit of time to learn it.
You'll come around to generated content as you get more accustomed to it. It is quite powerful and not terribly difficult to use if you spend a bit of time to learn it.
> I have long wept for our future and this is likely a reminder of why we fail as a species.
Lay off Reddit, mate.
Lay off Reddit, mate.
That is not an argument, friend.
An argument for what?
Your original statement is ridiculous to any sane person.
You are incorrect. I offered a position:
I do not like the approach presented in the article and I am unhappy about it being rewarded in society.
<< Your original statement is ridiculous to any sane person.
Would you be willing to elaborate? What is insane about it exactly?
I do not like the approach presented in the article and I am unhappy about it being rewarded in society.
<< Your original statement is ridiculous to any sane person.
Would you be willing to elaborate? What is insane about it exactly?
> so we’d better check from the back door. What if it's unlocked, they are waiting for the pizza guy and there is actually a party and free drinks?
> Designing a fake delivery company seemed to be the most logical, straightforward way of contacting a person.
I understand part of this is tongue in cheek but wtf?
> Designing a fake delivery company seemed to be the most logical, straightforward way of contacting a person.
I understand part of this is tongue in cheek but wtf?
I’d love to have these guys on a creative team.
This is awesome, I love it.
What vile people. Each step is a further descent into hell.
Nice!
Disturbing. Real sociopath energy. They'll probably be millionaires in no time, honestly.
[deleted]
God, this sucks so hard. Was your last venture NFTs by any chance?
The email post is from earlier and this are by far my fav articles on HN on bro
You'll love the guy that hired chicks to watch him work then as well tsk
I've seen your nick in other treads today, you seem to be down voted everywhere. I wonder why
loved this story, wickedly creative. This type of creativity should be encouraged.
Delivering unsolicited packages to company mailrooms?
I've worked in fairly sensitive roles, and if a package like this arrived at my workplace the police would become involved immediately. And if asked whether I'd want to press charges, I would say yes, absolutely. When you've received death threats at work, and seen female colleagues receiving rape threats, your tolerance for this kind of crap wears thin.