[WnZ39p0Dgydaz1]

What I don't understand about these scams is: It must be quite difficult and expensive to create shrink-wrapped modified devices. But the letter itself is so full of spelling and grammar mistakes that it can't be taken seriously. How is it possible that you can create these devices but you're incapable of having someone proofread the letter!?

> sent you a new device you must switch to a new device

> this *kinda* breach

> there is a manual inside your new box you can read that

Seriously?

[jsiepkes]

The scammers probably live somewhere where it is "easy" to manufacture such a product (including packaging etc.). However getting access to someone who besides fluent English also "knows" western culture enough to use the right tone in the letter is apparently harder. As an example in an other comment I joked about a western company would never apologize for "our faulty security system".

So it's just a guess but with those two observations I would guess the scammers are from China.

[derivagral]

Consensus appears to be that the mistakes are part of the funnel. You aren't the target!

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-nigerian-scam-emails-are...

[WnZ39p0Dgydaz1]

That makes sense but I don't know if you can really draw a parallel between email and these devices:

(1) Sending email is nearly free, creating devices is not. Not sure if the economics match.

(2) False positive filtering matter because spammer need to manually reply to emails, creating more work. But with these devices this is not the case, it's all automated. There is no need to filter out smart people.

[UncleMeat]

This only makes sense if the bad grammar is prior to the expensive part of the scam. In this case the expensive part of the scam was mailing the thing. So the funnel doesn't work.

[eythian]

I'm not convinced that argument makes sense in this context, they want you to plug the thing in. They're not trying to filter for gullibility, they want to be as convincing as possible.