> he probably threw that in just to make you think there's an option besides the police
That's what I thought, too. For some reason, scammers often have high social intelligence. Maybe it's like with any other domain: if you understand how computers work, you are compelled to use computers a lot. If you understand how people work, you must be compelled to use people?
To be honest, this comment section is a bit mind-blowing to me, it really just goes to show how the behaviour that I take for granted isn't at all the default for other people. I would never, ever, have thought about people wanting to maximise the windows without actually hiding the menu bar.
I'm a young (24) dev working in a very large org (tens of thousands large), I often feel like most people should never have been allowed to use a computer in their office.
Young or old.
Of course it's silly because of the global productivity gains. And it may just be my innate misanthropy which made me a nerd when I was younger now manifesting in this new form.
I'm already an old man annoyed by people my age and annoyed by older people. But truth is, I'm annoyed by most non technical people.
PS: I like discussing technics with people from non tech fields though, luthiers, masons, cooks etc...
Summary:
When people are good at what they do, they don't mistake the author for another person and are able to discuss intelligent topics while working.
However, since only one age value can be actually correct in this case, the use of logic looks less like a feature of the programmer's mind and more like a bug.
One of them is a case of GIGO, using "36 years ago" as input when the correct value is 35. Fixing that reduces it to two values, and the discrepancy is down to day versus year granularity.
Pokemon was a big phenomenon in the late 90s. So the latest interest is really building on a solid foundation established 15 years ago. I'm sure each new game would have helped pull in new fans too.
That's what I thought, too. For some reason, scammers often have high social intelligence. Maybe it's like with any other domain: if you understand how computers work, you are compelled to use computers a lot. If you understand how people work, you must be compelled to use people?