Spam Stories with Lee and Larry

I’ve recently found some weird comments caught in my spam filter. They all list “linux” top-level domains as their websites, linux.ca or linux.co.uk, and the name the would-be poster provides invariably conflicts with their email address. For example, “Jack’s” email username is “jill_bateman.” Another “Jack” provides his or her (or, more likely, its) email username as “solomonbelt.” Are they the same Jack, attempting to post from two different IP addresses, one of which is in the UK and the other of which is in Buffalo, NY? Or are they two different Jacks? One commenter gives their name as “http://technorati.com,” after giving “linux.ca” as their website. Which one is it, Technorati? If that’s even your real name.

But it gets weirder. I initially found the content of the spam comments inscrutable, but they appear to be random excerpts from insipid stories about two twin boys, Lee and Larry, having colorless, infantile, poorly-edited theological discussions with their parents. Quotation marks are replaced with question marks. Certain words are, apparently, fed repeatedly into thesaurus.com until the author reaches a word marginally related to the original, at best. For example:

Effectively boys,? Mommy finally mｅntioned аfter tһeyd come up with plenty of silly idеas of ԝhat God
did for enjoyable,?What God really likes is when folқs love one anotther
and deal with eacdһ other like ѡe do in oour family.?
Thаt madee sense to Lee andԁ Larry so Lee hugged Momny and Larry
hugged daddy to simply make God happy.

The word choice is even more clearly the work of unthinking robots in this example:

Ꮤell, what does God liкe?? Lee added. ?I imply, we like cookies and cartoonss and toys,
hоwever what kind of issues are enjoyable for God?? It was a query thаt f᧐r a minute Mommy and Daddy needed to assume about.

“I imply?” “However, what kind of issues are enjoyable for God?” What kind of mutant pod-person child is Lee?

I know machines are propagating these comments, most likely targeting blogs that mention God via some algorithm and submitting these comments with automated brute-force attempts. But it’s vaguely insulting that somewhere, at the top of the robot chain, there is at least one human being thinking this drivel will actually get past someone. It’s disgustingly parasitic to use poorly-written children’s stories to propagate links for profit. And bringing God into it? It’s taking God’s name in vain. It’s garbage.

But ultimately, it’s a laughable attempt. So here I am laughing at it. If you’d like to laugh along, here is my entire Lee-and-Larry-inanity spam comment collection.

Advertisements