IT Professionals

Digital Thoughts

Posted by on Dec 14, 2004 | 3 Comments

I love to phish! I have since it first came about. I know that sounds crazy, but rarely does one get such opportunities!

Let me explain. When I get a notice to update all my personal information for the banks I don’t have money in, and some of them that I do, I can hardly wait to fill in the blanks!

I am personally registered with numerous phishing supply companies as Fred Flintstone of Bedrock, MA. They know about my daughter, Pebbles, and my job at the quarry, plus my income, to the nearest clam, and my credit card numbers, SS#, date of birth, and mother’s maiden name (Petrifina). I know it will be very useful to them.

So I have fun with them! You should, too!

Now the Nigerian scammers, that is another story. I faithfully answer every wonderful opportunity for vast riches with the dormant bank accounts, overpayments from oil companies, death-escrowed $40,000,000, of which I get 10-20% (more if I negotiate with the poor widow) that I get. But my answer to them is a resounding “You should be ashamed of yourself! Does your mother know what you are doing?”

I have yet to get an answer… or a penny…

And let’s not get into the automatic dialers. I speak the best fake Chinese on the planet! [Warren Ward]

  • Scott Bartels

    4000 dpi is BS marketing. They are counting each color as its own dot. If you want to compare you should count each sub-pixel in a display. Woohoo! Triple the ‘resolution’! Here’s what you should be looking at. Printing NEEDS 300 DPI to look decent. Most commercial printing is 300 DPI images. There are special print methods for fine art that can reproduce 600 DPI or higher but the differences to the eye are very subtle. Compare this to screen DPI though. A 72 DPI photo at 1:1 pixel on a large LCD will look perfectly crisp but if you were to print the same photo at the same physical size as its screen size it will look very sub-par. Why do relatively low DPI displays make photos look better I can not explain but it does. I therefore believe that a higher res display will only enhance this effect further meaning at 200 PPI the image will be every bit as good as commercial print.

    • http://robertglenfogarty.com/ Robert Glen Fogarty

      Excellent explanation, Scott. Thanks for taking the time to comment!

  • Scott Bartels

    4000 dpi is BS marketing. They are counting each color as its own dot. If you want to compare you should count each sub-pixel in a display. Woohoo! Triple the ‘resolution’! Here’s what you should be looking at. Printing NEEDS 300 DPI to look decent. Most commercial printing is 300 DPI images. There are special print methods for fine art that can reproduce 600 DPI or higher but the differences to the eye are very subtle. Compare this to screen DPI though. A 72 DPI photo at 1:1 pixel on a large LCD will look perfectly crisp but if you were to print the same photo at the same physical size as its screen size it will look very sub-par. Why do relatively low DPI displays make photos look better I can not explain but it does. I therefore believe that a higher res display will only enhance this effect further meaning at 200 PPI the image will be every bit as good as commercial print.