We are all at risk of falling for a scam. Yesterday a friend opened his computer to flashing lights and warnings that terrible things would happen to his documents if he didn’t call the posted number right away–which he did. Long story short he’s ...
Yesterday a friend opened his computer to flashing lights and warnings that terrible things would happen to his documents if he didn’t call the posted number right away–which he did. Long story short he’s OK after a visit to his bank that reassured him and noted he was far from the only one to fall for the swindle. They did not offer him a new credit card.
He had provided the last four digits of his credit card and his address. He was asked–by a man with an American name and pronounced Indian accent–to get gift cards at Lowes and Home Depot. His first mistake was to call the number that accompanied the flashing lights–and not AOL whom the caller claimed to represent–to confirm that there really was a problem.
I don’t answer unrecognized phone numbers and try to see who the caller was especially if there’s no message. Most of the time I don’t get anywhere but with this number–844-335-8230—Google found this from a potential target: “844-335-8230 called and said they are United Health Care and they wanted to talk to me concerning my prescriptions. I told them I didn’t need to talk to them because I can talk to my doctor about my prescriptions. At first I thought they were United Health Care and They asked for my date of birth and I gave it to them. Then I hung up on them.”
The number called me three days in a row. I never picked up.
This is what Google taught me about 844 numbers. They “are toll-free and legitimate, but repeated calls from them are often scams using caller ID spoofing or aggressive tactics to extract money or personal information.
“The 844 area code is a toll-free prefix in the North American Numbering Plan, similar to 800, 888, and 877. It is non-geographic, meaning the caller could be anywhere in the U.S. or Canada, and the prefix itself does not indicate legitimacy or a scam. Legitimate businesses, such as banks, insurance companies, and customer service centers, frequently use 844 numbers. However, scammers also exploit this prefix because it appears official and can bypass local suspicion.”
Watch out for 844 numbers that seem to come from a legitimate company or messages about legal action or account fraud. There may be repeated calls without messages [as I got] and the well-known request for personal information, even remote access to your devices.
“It’s always something,” a friend often says. Stuff seems to come at us faster and faster. Have you become aware of scams that are new to you or did any of your acquaintances fall for a swindle recently?
One of the goals of public relations is to get a fair shake—a balanced story with media—if controversy arises about their client. While this didn’t always happen in the past, you had a good shot as most reporters strove to produce balanced stories.
Hard to do these days as illustrated by the latest intrusion by the administration on the 165 year old Stars and Stripes. The Pentagon fired publisher Max Lederer, editor-in-chief Erik Slavin, and Middle East reporter Lara Korte. Lederer was scheduled to retire but they fired him anyway.
Associated Press reporter Jocelyn Noveck reasoned the firings of the EIC and reporter were for “insubordination after they spoke publicly against any interference by the Defense Department in the military news outlet that has a long history of editorial independence.” She continued “It was the latest move by an administration that has grown increasingly aggressive toward the news media.”
Noveck wrote “The moves come at a time when the Trump administration, in its second term, has been progressively combative toward the media — including sharply curtailing Pentagon access for the press corps that covers the Defense Department. Trump or other parts of the executive branch have also, in policy and in the courts, grappled with The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press and The New York Times — in addition to using the FCC to target broadcast networks.”
She quoted Slavin as saying “he was being fired ‘for stating in a CBS interview that hypothetical censorship of news for service members would constitute a red line.” Korte participated in the same interview.’” And “I stand by the principle that Stars and Stripes must remain editorially independent, as required by law and by the department’s own policies.”
How many canaries in the coalmine do we need to experience before we put our collective feet down or am I overreacting? Will the media recover from these assaults?
I’ve attended weddings of two happily married couples who met through matchmaking apps and know of others who have met their companions. These apps seem to work.
In the day I had arbitrary wishes of the kind of person I wanted to go out with before I married such as “a military man in uniform,” and “a guy who owns a sports car.” There was nothing about kind or funny and smart. I don’t recall if I thought of requirements for husband candidacy. I didn’t think of marriage at that time. My wishes were easy to achieve. Not so Pascaretta’s requirements. He is 38.
Catherine Pearson’s is a long article with interesting reader comments. I’ve chosen only a few highlights.
According to Pearson, “Pascaretta also sent the [matchmaking] team an Excel spreadsheet cataloging his must-haves: an accomplished professional, ideally a doctor, lawyer or executive, ‘someone like me who has been ‘heads down’ career focus, but now is ready for a serious relationship.’ Someone who has never been married or is at least amicably divorced. Someone shorter than him. And someone between the ages of 25 and 43. It also detailed his strong preference for a woman who is, among other things, ‘naturally pretty’ and ‘stylish,’ ‘loyal, classy, ambitious, elegant, feminine, emotionally stable,’ from a ‘well-respected family’ and who went to a top-tier school.”
My reaction to his requirements is: Anything else?
Pearson wrote: “Pascaretta’s contract with Agape Match guarantees him at least one date per month from the company’s massive database of single women — most of whom have signed up for free, uploading a photo, filling out a questionnaire and then sitting for a 60-minute “discovery call” where the matchmakers quiz them about everything from their ideal date to their political views.”
Do you think paying large sums of money should increase the chances that you’ll discover the love of your life? What about setting requirements for your intended—should you ignore some on your list if the major ones are checked?
This fall, freshman at the University of Michigan College of Literature, Sciences, and the Arts won’t get grades the first semester. They will get P or NC for pass or no credit. Why? To improve student mental health.
According to CoPilot Search, “The policy is part of a broader trend in higher education to reduce academic pressure in response to rising mental health concerns among college students.”
The rationale ranged from giving freshman time to adapt to the demands of college; encourage them to take challenging courses without impact on GPA and replace a culture of student competition with collaboration.
UMich isn’t alone. MIT has used a pass/no-record system for first-year students since 1968 to allow students to take challenging courses without the pressure of grades affecting their academic records. Caltech has a similar policy. Wellesley College replaces letter grades with pass/no credit on transcripts for freshman as does Swarthmore College according to CoPilot Search.
Tests were never my friend and always a source of anxiety. I’m not alone. Is it harmful when freshman anxiety is not acknowledged? And whether or not in high school or college aren’t we always tested whether to get a driver’s license or cook a portion of fries; pack and arrive at the station to catch a train; submit taxes by April 15 or clean the house before company arrives?
It’s hard to get into many universities and the anxiety waiting to hear whether a student is accepted or how much scholarship money they will receive, making the tuition hurdle possible, is astronomical. What is it about this crop of students that makes administrators feel they need special consideration for the first semester of their freshman year when they’ve survived the application process? What do you think of the initiative?
I popped into a CVS on a broiling afternoon to buy water as I’d stupidly left home without a bottle. I asked a clerk, who was dealing with boxes of merchandise, if he could open it for me as the top wouldn’t budge and I didn’t have a rubberband handy. As he gave it back I said, “So easy! Of course I loosened it up.” This robust young man responded: “I always say that.” We both laughed.
Sometimes bus drivers are patient and wait for a passenger, [plenty don’t]; the door staff at my apartment building are welcoming and helpful and as tiring as standing at a cash register all day must be, grocery store clerks at some stores are anxious to please and share a laugh.
So often I have pleasant exchanges and yet there’s the drumbeat that echoes an Oprah podcast headline: “We’ve Never Been Meaner. Here’s Why.”
I have only the promo to go by as I don’t subscribe to her podcast, but I get the gist and can’t disagree with how difficult it must be for frontline employees such as flight attendants, emergency medicine doctors, fast food workers, baristas and influencers. One of each is interviewed in the podcast. They talk about the extreme levels of rudeness they experience at work and online, according to the promo.
Oprah and one of the experts, Dr. Jay Van Bavel, professor of psychology and neuroscience at NYU, and the director of the NYU Center for Conflict and Cooperation, delved into the subject. Dr. Van Bavel broke down what is causing this rise in incivility and shared some ideas about how we can all do better.
Copilot Search shared these highlights. Dr. Van Bavel says, “humans haven’t suddenly become worse — the social environment has changed in ways that make incivility more likely.” He pointed to stress and inequality, social media and leaders modeling contempt. According to Copilot Search, “In the Oprah Winfrey conversation, Dr. Van Bavel also noted the role of AI in harming relationships, reality TV normalizing bad behavior, and the normalization of rudeness in public spaces”
Do you think we’ve never been meaner, or have we always been grouchy and short-tempered? Was our bad behavior not captured and amplified as much in the past?
