It’s a high pressure situation in the middle of rush hour traffic. They like to target unsuspecting older white people, and unaware females.

If you get aggressive, they will spit on your window, break your wipers off, and hit your car.

Things can get really ugly if you get out of your car and try to confront them: https://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/community/criminal-justic...

This is not CashApp's responsibility to fix any more than it would be the US Treasury's responsibility to fix if I hand them a $100 bill.

If they ask for $10 and you give them a $100 asking for change yes it is the police's job to fix.

Cashapp doesnt bear the responsability of highway robbermen

So you’re validating what Hindenburg research is saying correct?

A bunch of their transaction volume is scam money that is hard to reverse, and it’s not Blocks fault as you say.

> I don't think you have anyone to blame

It’s a negligent move for sure, but a crime is still a crime.

Having someone steal your money without your consent is still theft and they are still the perpetrator of the crime.

The victim-blaming mentality on the internet is wild. Being negligent or naive doesn’t shift 100% of the blame to the victim when a crime occurs.

You're focusing on whether it's the phone owner's fault or the thief's fault, my point is that it isn't the app's fault.

And then you call them to complain that someone was able to drain your bank account, and they say “sorry, you’re on your own”

It drives me nuts that anytime you indicate that a victim behaved unwisely and caution others to behave wisely to help avoid being victimized in the same way, somebody always gets their hackles up about “victim blaming”.

Two things can be true at once: the perpetrator of a crime is the one responsible, AND the victim might have avoided victimhood had they acted more prudently.

Humans communicate in stories. The “cautionary tale” or example of folly that led to woe is a pattern as old as our species could talk.

It is NOT true that cautioning people not to act imprudently, and providing an example, is “victim blaming”. I don’t hear anyone saying that we should not pursue and prosecute the perpetrator.

So just can it with the hair trigger “victim blaming” accusation.

> I don't think you have anyone to blame if you give your phone with a logged in money app to a stranger who is begging for money.

> caution others to behave wisely to help avoid being victimized in the same way

In this case though this is not a caution to others, it's literally a statement of victim shaming/blaming.

> The victim-blaming mentality on the internet is wild. Being negligent or naive doesn’t shift 100% of the blame to the victim when a crime occurs.

Nobody is claiming the criminals are blameless or that a crime is not a crime.

It's astoundingly dumb to hand a piece of electronics worth several hundred dollars to someone in such an interaction, even if they cannot use it to electronically steal your money.

The criminal is a criminal, and the person who hands their phone to someone under these circumstances is mind bogglingly naive. The former fact is tautological so it's natural to focus on the latter part, the one that boggles the mind. How could anybody possibly fall for this? Were they very young? Were they old? Were they distracted or drunk or lulled by the perpetrator? Were they out of towners? Were they intimidated? One wonders.