Cybersecurity: AI Dulls Our Critical Thinking and Enables Scammers to be More Effective (Microsoft Warned Us!)

The rise of "AI" (mostly Large Language Models, or LLMs, like ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and so on) does enable a lot of "productivity hacks". However, Microsoft had warned us back in Jan 2025 that the most you rely on them, the more atrophied your critical thinking skills. Most "knowledge workers" who admitted to using AI tools, only use their own critical thinking skills to "fact-check" the LLMs. This suggests that the "average user" may be doing even less than that. 

This bodes ill for the average user, as they seem to regard ChatGPT and LLMs as some sort of generic "expert", when it is nothing of the sort. Indeed, merely by browsing /r/cybersecurity_help there are a number of topics where the poster openly admitted to "I checked my logs with ChatGPT..." when they lacked even the skills to fact-check the LLM they used. They suspected something, and they wanted ChatGPT to confirm their suspicions. 

But that's not the actually worrying part. Instead, Microsoft security is ringing the alarm: scammers are using LLMs to craft their latest scams to enhance their social engineering... by leveraging every sort of fakery possible, from fake website to fake job posting to fake customer service chatbots, because making them is so much easier with LLMs consolidating such knowledge. 

Be wary out there. 

Cybersecurity: Hilarious (to me) Explanation for Attempted Verification Code Fraud

One of the scams that had been around a while was the verification code scam/fraud. To make a long story short, scammers, who cannot get a new account because they had abused their own account, would attempt to trick other people into "verifying" them by entering the victim's phone number when registering a new account, then claim "I'm just verifying you are real, gimme that code you just got". If you do give them that code, you just helped them get a new account to scam from, and now YOUR phone number is associated with them (and that also means you may not be able to register an account later on that service because your phone number's been "used" (and blacklisted due to abuse). 

Today, I just ran into a new spin on this old scam that gave me a chuckle. On reddit's /r/cybersecurity, someone, who may be romance scammed, wrote that someone, who claimed to be in the (US) army, sent her something he claimed to be a STIR verification code, "to verify you exist". 

Clearly, this is a scammer who tried to do the "verification code scam", but this STIR angle is new. 

So what is STIR? It has nothing to do with verification code, at least the type you send via SMS. 

STIR/SHAKEN is a protocol that was being implemented by phone carriers to "authenticate" callers, to combat the spam call problem. Similar to a website using HTTPS instead of regular HTTP, each phone carrier for a business is supposed to link a certificate to the main phone number. So when that caller calls out, the recipient's phone service can look up the certificate, verify it with public key encryption, and thus authenticate that the call did indeed came from that business. STIR is the outbound phase, and SHAKEN is the reverse-lookup/authenticate phase. Once the caller was authenticated, you get a "caller verified" checkmark as your phone receives the actual call. Obviously spammer who spoofed their caller ID cannot pass this authentication, and thus, no checkmark. 

Needless to say, we advise her to drop the scammer like a hot potato. The verification is nonsense and a lie. 

Truce with DB did not hold

As expected, DB and partner have decided to interpret my question on how applicable RICO act is to MLM in the most negatively light possible.

An observation about a large MLM had tried to settle the civil RICO suit was construed as I am somehow supporting this MLM, as the partner claiming that I showed my true colors, when I cited the case to prove that the case had not been resolved, therefore this "private prosecution" doesn't mean anything YET.

Again, my position was misinterpreted. I don't disagree with the opinion that MLM industry has organized and entrenched itself to mount a vigorous defense for its right to exist. I agree that MLM fundamentally is flawed and causes losses for most of its partcipants based on available historical data. I simply question whether it had risen to the point where it should be considered "organized crime" in the style of Mafia and need to be prosecuted with the RICO act, and furthermore whether RICO act even applies to a "business model", even a fundamentally flawed one such as MLM.

(BTW, you should read a report written by an organized crime specialist G. Robert Blakey, it's fascinating stuff, about how much similarity there is between Amway and Mafia. Just keep in mind this guy was retained by an opponent of Amway to write this report, so it ain't exactly one-sided third-party objective opinion, but rather, expert testimony presented by one side. )

Yet DB and partner chose to interpret my skepticism to the RICO act application as opposition to their view "MLM is fraud", when it is not.

This shows the exact same pattern as before. Previously, DB chose to interpret my statement "MLM is legal (under certain circumstance)" (NOT an exact quote) as conflicting with their dogma "MLM is fraud (and therefore illegal)" (NOT an exact quote). It doesn't matter how many qualifiers I add, he takes personal offense at that expression, even after he corrected it to say "MLM has not been declared illegal". He simply refuse to even CONSIDER the notion that a fraud is legal UNTIL specifically outlawed, esp. if it's a new form (and once entrenched, it will defend itself to the death).  He chose to interpret "MLM is legal, but fraud" as a DEFENSE of MLM, instead of a statement of fact as the way things are.  Though he eventually conceded the point (by lamenting how law makers failed the public).

Same here. I asked if RICO act even applies to MLM (and a certain MLM company), and DB chose to interpret that as a defense of this particular MLM company (and thus, to his viewpoint). He had simply again, refuse to consider the possibility that RICO Act may not apply to the situation he had envisioned. His view is that MLM is a racket, thus racketeering law automatically applies, even though RICO act specified 35 specific offenses as "racketeering activity" that warrants application of the RICO act. Of the 35 offenses listed, maybe two activities are the most likely to apply: wire fraud and mail fraud, but both are a bit of a stretch, as explained before.

So, is it an attack on the fundamental view "MLM is a racket"? Or just  skepticism on "Does RICO Law apply to MLM?" Again, a matter of degree. If one's mind is only black and white, then perhaps skepticism at a PART of the claim can be construed as opposition. But that's not much of "free-thinking", is it?

DB Update again... Except it ain't DB.

Just when I thought DB and I reached a truce, his partner decided to play censor.

Previously I've explained an incident where a comment about DB's writing style was censored by partner, and how DB is fond of claiming that MLM is a racket and ought to be treated like one by applying the RICO act on them.

So I took a look at the RICO act, at the actual text, mind you, NOT the wikipedia summary. It defined rackteering activity as a LOT of things, but none of them really applies to what MLM does.

So I posted the observation over, hoping for an honest discussion on the limitations of RICO act and its applicability on MLM. as DB claimed that other countries should adopt similar legislation to RICO.

The observation was DELETED by partner, with a comment about it's unsolicited, misinterpreted, and untrue.

Unsolicited is fine, but hardly irrelevant, as it was DB that kept mentioning RICO act  (3 times in past 5 blog posts).

Misinterpeted... Okay, except the partner claimed I misinterpreted WIKIPEDIA. I did NOT! I interpreted teh ACTUAL TEXT of the law, NOT Wikipedia! (I even included to link to the text)

Untrue, that people have inintiated "private prosecution" of Amway under RICO act... Okay... Google... yep, some former Amway reps sued Amway under RICO act, which is one of the provisions... private lawsuits. However, the case has NOT concluded, and Amway is prepared to settle the case back in April 2011, but the judge didn't like the settlement and told them to work it out some more.

That wasn't a conviction or even an admission or guilt.

Thus, the partner's behavior is extremely troubling. To be blunt, this person is censoring any comments that can be remotely construed as counter to their viewpoint, that they cannot debate or ridicule. if they think they can ridicule it, then they will publish it and ridicule it. If they can't, they'll delete it and claim "they don't allow untruths to be posted for the free-thinkers".

Clearly, there's a limit to their free-thinking.

Now let's go onto RICO, and MLM.

The lawsuit, which can be found here, claimed that Amway's business is fundamentally fraudulent, thus any attempt in mailing stuff out to members and communication over the Internet to promote such business model would constitute mail and wire fraud, which ARE two activities listed under racketeering activities under the RICO act.

As you can see, this gets messy very quickly, but then, lawyers are known to stretch the truth somewhat. :)

To make RICO law applicable to Amway, you must prove that wire fraud and mail fraud took place

You then have to prove that the magazine subscriptions are indeed, fraudulent, or contain material that are fraudulent, thus, constituting mail fraud.

You then have to prove that the internet communications are indeed, fraudulent, or contain material that are fraudulent thus constituting wire fraud.

If you can prove TWO of those acts are fraudulent, then you can have a RICO case, as two acts within 10 years constitutes racketeering.

You see the problem? What's in the Amway magazine? Have you read one? It's basically a bunch of self-help tips, profiles on 'successful' IBOs, announcement of new products, new markets, and other developments. In other words, a cheerleading magazine designed to make Amway look good. But is it fraudulent?

Or is Amway's website fraudulent? Because if it is, then it's wire fraud.

See the problem? How do you exactly prove that the magazine is fraudulent or promotes fraud? How about proving that the website is fraudulent or promotes fraud?

Hmmm...

Gifting Circles are ILLEGAL Ponzi Schemes!

I've seen morons that claim "gifting circles" are legal because no returns are "expected".

Well, the Federal Government begs to differ, as it is investigating into such on the East Coast.

So what the heck is gifting circle?

You start at the "outside" of the circle. You need to gift some money into the person in the center.

Keep giving, and you move closer to the center.

When you reach the center, YOU will be receiving the money.

Sounds interesting? Sounds stupid to me. It's a pretty darn blatant Ponzi scheme.

Yet some morons claim that because IRS allow "gifting" of assets under tax code, gifting circle is legal.

Clearly they didn't read the section on pyramid schemes.

Related articles

• Lethbridge Ponzi scheme results in 3 arrests (cbc.ca)
• Darren Berg pleads guilty in Ponzi scheme (bizjournals.com)

Does Massive Vulnerability to Pyramid Scheme Hint at Deeper Problems in India?

Recently India had been rocked by a massive financial fraud known as "SpeakAsia". The company started almost two years ago and claim to be a "survey company" where participants just need to join, get monthly e-zine, and then take surveys to make money. However, casual examination of its compensation package revealed to be a thinly disguised pyramid scheme that relies on recruiting new members, who also subscribe to the program. The more you recruit, the more you "earn".

What is interesting about the phenomenon is the fervent defense by the "believers" of SpeakAsia, who shows all signs of being a brainwashed cult member, who can only recite "SpeakAsia is Great, death of all enemies of SpeakAsia" or its variants. Some even called upon death of the government as it is the only thing standing between them and prosperity under SpeakAsia.

Is there some thing to learn from this mess? Is there some deep-seated vulnerability of Indians to scams?


The Cult of SpeakAsia

In April and May 2011 TV Station did a massive expose on the scam, and lid started to came off the scam, which by then claimed two million members in and around India, even though the company is supposedly based in Singapore. Multiple agencies in India started investigating, and accounts were frozen, then unfrozen, then frozen again. COO was then arrested for financial irregularities and forgery. (See details )

What remains constant is massive amount of "popular support" by SpeakAsia members, who sprouted statements such as

india poor. Do u know why. coz some people like this word. Who r they. Who fight against saol to get down. They are bad man of india. Die badman of india. if u die than we can earn. We can rich we want to hear india is rich.

SAOL = Speak Asia Online

Basically, the only thing standing between them and prosperity through this scam is the government, so the government must go.

The calmer ones blame the government for freezing the assets of SpeakAsia so they lose their money:

But what about the people who have already put in thousands of rupees into this, because of the govt. taking action, the current investors are also not getting their money back!! is that not wrong ? shouldn’t the govt protect the investors’ interest ? 

SpeakAsia definitely did not help the situation by releasing a video portraying all challengers as the devil(s) incarnate (red cape and devil face).

(See screen caps of videos and the actual comments at
http://behindmlm.com/companies/speak-asia-online/speak-asia-lose-the-plot-bollywood-meets-mlm/
and
http://behindmlm.com/companies/speak-asia-online/speak-asia-online-coo-tarak-bajpai-arrested-in-mumbai/comment-page-1/#comment-28420 )

Did all these people (let's say, HALF of the panelists, or 1 million) got brainwashed into trusting this SpeakAsia scam more than the government? Or is there some deep sense of distrust of the government that remained untapped until this fraud exposed it and exploited it?


Pyramid Scheme and Power of Reality Inversion

Pyramid schemes, when gotten large enough, can actually topple governments. Government of Albania was destroyed in 1997-98 by pyramid schemes and over 2000 people died in the chaotic aftermath. A series of pyramid schemes ensnared 2/3rd of population, according to IMF report, and it took several years for Albania's economy to recover.

In Colombia, a major Ponzi scheme ran by DMG Group (which also was used to launder money from drug trafficking) collapsed in 2008, and in a rare cooperation between nations, the head of the scheme, David Murcia Guzman, was extradited to the US, convicted of money laundering, and will serve 8-year sentence here, THEN remanded back to Colombia to serve ANOTHER 30 years sentence. The scam involved up to two BILLION dollars, and severely damaged the credibility of the Uribe government when it was revealed that two of President Uribe's sons were good friends of the head perp. Riots broke out in several cities and mobs appeared to ransack (or try to) DMG offices. Police had to use riot gas to disperse the crowds.

What's interesting is some of these people claim that David Murcia Guzman was doing the country a favor... by passing on some of the wealth to the poor.

But there was a twist to this Icarus-like story: many of the small investors in D.M.G. saw Mr. Murcia not as a swindler but as their savior and protested his capture in almost a dozen cities. They claim the government’s intervention in D.M.G., not the nature of its activities, caused the loss of their savings. A hunger strike by his most die-hard supporters, who want his release and the reopening of D.M.G., persisted well into January in the colonial heart of Bogotá.

... Supporters chanted “Crea en Dios y en David Murcia” (“Believe in God and in David Murcia”).

          ( link to NY Times Article here )

What is it about pyramid schemes that can lead people to see evil as good, and see villain as hero? The only thing to compare it to is a cult, and not merely a cult, but a DESTRUCTIVE CULT.


Pyramid Scheme as a Cult

Virtually every nation have laws against operating pyramid schemes, because the losers vastly outnumber the winners. European Union has laws under "consumer protection directive", and is a common set of laws across all European Union Members. In the US, the laws are slightly fragmented, as some is regulated by SEC, some by FTC, and some by individual states.

Indeed, such a problem is in India, where multiple agencies realized they don't seem to have laws to enforce on a company which is not physically present in India. While India does have a "Prize Chits and Money Circulation Fraud Law (anti-)" there is no National Agency to enforce this law. Instead, enforcement must be initiated by individual province. The National Reserve Bank of India, as well as Criminal Investigative Division (CID) and Economic Offenses Wing (EOW), of various provincial governments finally responded recently with arrests and freezing of accounts, but it is estimated that over 100 million dollars have already left India for accounts in Singapore.

And it is amazing how much support this scheme still has among the "Speak Asians", as they refer to themselves (actually, that's a company term, as one of its marketing campaigns is "I am a Speak Asian"). Do they exhibit any OTHER signs of cult membership? These are the signs from CultClinic.com

• Thinking in black and white terms  -- YES
  
• Using a new language/cultic jargon  -- YES
  
• Saying goodbye to all old friends and only seeing people affiliated with, or not critical of the cult -- PROBABLY YES
  
• Creating distance from family, especially during holidays and family events -- UNKNOWN
  
• Euphoric, yet simultaneously tired and worn -- PROBABLY YES
  
• Humorless -- UNKNOWN
  
• A change in diet and sleep patterns -- UNKNOWN
  
• Low on money -- YES
  
• Poor grades -- UNKNOWN
  
• A dismissal of their life prior to involvement with the group as "all bad" -- UNKNOWN, PROBABLY YES
  
• A change in goals, priorities, and life plan -- YES
  
• Return to child-like behavior -- UNKNOWN
  
• Dogmatic adherence to new beliefs/ideas, with the inability, or lack of interest to logically assess these new beliefs -- YES
  
• Secrecy -- UNKNOWN

Wow, that's a lot of yes signs for something that wasn't supposed to be a cult at all.

Vulnerability to a Cult (of Money)


It is interesting that such a cult of money is often formed in the poorer areas of the world. Colombia, Albania, Indonesia, India... all have seen bouts of pyramid schemes where many are cheated of money, because they see the "potential" of such schemes, but not its illegality.

What do pyramid schemes offer? "Instant riches", enough to change the life of a typical family in those areas.

They don't care if it's illegal or not. They just want the chance, if they don't have to directly cheat, hurt, kill, or steal to get it. If you just TELL these people it's illegal pyramid scheme, they won't believe it. They can self-justify themselves into seeing it as "it's okay, it's not THAT illegal." Esp. if they are taught to see it as "introduce that other party to the opportunity so THAT person can also be rich like you."

It is also worth noting that these countries have rather low opinion of their governments in general. So words of the government are not always trusted by the people. After the DMG fiasco, 77% of the people in the area thinks things are going badly, and they blame the government more than DMG.

Add some mind-control techniques, and you got yourself something that acts like a cult, but is not a cult per se. There is no "leader" and there is no "dogma" (other than "_____ is great, join us.")

Conclusion

Pyramid schemes are illegal, as it leaves damage both financial and psychic. Members are basically brainwashed into believing in money and the scheme, and the conversion is subtle yet unmistakable.

It is important for all to be aware of such schemes, and alert authorities at first sign of trouble. The earlier you can get to the scheme, the less victims it will have.

Baloney Detection Kit used on pseudo-MLM scams

The Baloney Detection Kit by Michael Shermer I highlighted earlier can be applied to other types of baloney as well, not just pseudo-science. Here's its application go pseudo-MLM or pseudo-economics (i.e. financial fraud and claims).

http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-apply-the-Baloney-Test-as-test-of-legitimacy-to-any-MLM-Opportunity

Related articles

• 5 Differences Between a Legitimate MLM and a Pseudo-MLM Scam (richdadobservations.blogspot.com)
• PowerBalance Admits Their Wristbands Are a Scam [Snake Oil] (gizmodo.com)

How NOT to debate: assume other guy's insulting you

Image via Wikipedia

EDIT: Michael Shermer

EDITOR'S NOTE: this is a rant, against a certain individual and a blog that doesn't even belong to him, who will remain unnamed. He is free to insult me on that blog-that-does-not-belong-to-him. He has discovered this little rant, and has "responded" by again, distorting what I said/wrote through his own filters. 

If you read my earlier blog posts you'll see that a certain anti-fraud crusader had somehow concluded that because I didn't join him in denouncing his most hated scam (hint: starts with A) I must somehow be against him.

Recently, he started denouncing some OTHER scam in Asia, a fake survey company. So I offered an olive branch, posting a comment that basically said great job, don't you see that there are scams even MORE evil than your most hated scam? "Most hated scam" actually have products to sell, whereas this scam has nothing, similar to that other scam (which is what got our verbal war started). I then cited Michael Shermer, head of Skeptic Society, and his 10 rules to detect baloney.

Instead of taking the olive branch, it was slapped away. According to this "crusader", I had somehow assumed that he and his readers don't know about Michael Shermer, which is an insult to his intelligence. In his own words:

Typically, Mr. Chang assumes that we must have no knowledge of Michael Shermer.

He had assumed that I had assumed that he doesn't know about Michael Shermer.

WTF?!

Then he proceeds to insult me about my lack of intelligence in order to understand his point of view, and proceed to call me fraud sympathizer. Again, in his own words:

However, Mr. Chang doesn't attempt to refute the quantifiable evidence that (despite the 'AXXXX' organization's own propaganda) during the previous 50+ years, virtually no products, or services, have been regularly retailed to the public for a profit by any of the tens of millions of ill-informed, and insolvent, individuals around the world, who have been churned through the economically-suicidal 'AXXXX' closed-market. 

The problem here is the guy completely misses the point. My "olive branch" was pointing out a scam that pretends to be MLM, but sold nothing. Clearly, it must be more evil than this "AXXXX" alleged scam that actually sells something. He completely ignores the point and went on to RANT about the evilness of "AXXXX". Again, because I didn't join him in attacking this AXXXX.... 

With a level of naivety which beggars belief, Mr. Chang apparently seriously expects your free-thinking readers, to follow his example, set aside 50+ years of quantifiable evidence and blindly believe the fanciful baloney that, because 'AXXXX' has products and services, the organization can simply oblige its adherents, henceforth regularly to retail this effectively-unsaleable wampum to the public for a profit. 

Again, this guy missed the point. The difference is while all these 50 years of evidence simply proves that it HAD NOT BEEN. It doesn't prove that it CANNOT. He was arguing about something else entirely.

Besides, I wasn't even talking about that AXXXX scam! I was talking about something else!

It is clear at this point any sort of olive branch would be utterly wasted. A simple name reference was construed as an insult to his intelligence, by making DOUBLE assumptions. Who's being insulting now? Then my reference was turned into a strawman attack, falsely attributing a viewpoint to me that I do NOT hold, and is in fact, irrelevant.

LESSON LEARNED: Don't talk to fanatics, even if they have their hearts at the right places. They will only drive you crazy. 


Fanatics act as if they have huge chips on their shoulders, so they are basically out to pick fights with you, provoke you at every opportunity. It's either join them or be their enemy. It's false dilemma.

EDIT: I see Mr. Brear has decided that this article had been written specifically against him and has responded in kind on someone else's blog, instead of commenting here.

Related articles

• Video Lecture, Michael Shermer: Why people believe strange things (jeanettebartha.wordpress.com)

Hey, we're on the SAME SIDE!

Image via WikipediaRecently, I seem to have gone into some sort of a "debate" on the merits of Amway with a guy called David Brear on another blog called CorporateFraudWatch.blogspot.com


The comments started calmly enough... I was thanked for bringing attention to the scam known as TVI Express. However, here Mr. Brear calls TVI Express "Amway Copy Cat". 


So I posted a few comments thanking them. 


Then David Brear goes on claiming I am some sort of expert, then ascribe some sort of a conspiracy group behind TVI Express. Quote: "Kasey Chang is undoubtedly a world authority on 'business opportunity' fraud in general, and the 'TVI Express' racket in particular"


So I posted what I have on the "mastermind" behind TVI Express, Tarun Trikha. 


David Brear, however, is completely fixated on Amway, as he immediately starts pointing out how Tarun Trikha seem to be using Amway cult tactics. 


I pointed out that TVI Express is far more of a scam than Amway ever could be. Amway at least HAVE some products, while TVI Express have no products AT ALL. Thus, Amway *could* be operated legally and ethically if one chooses to do so. 


Then the blog owner, Shyam pointed out that an Indian court had recently ruled that Amway India violated the Indian version of the anti-pyramid laws. 


So I replied that I am not familiar with Indian law, and one should be concentrating on the true scams such as TVI Express, instead of something that *may* still yet operate legitimately, such as Amway. 


That comment was not well received by Mr. David Brear. Apparently, my failure to join him in the wholesale condemnation of Amway (and probably the entire MLM industry) had made me his enemy, as his tone turned downright hostile. In not so many words, he called me an Amway apologist, claimed that I was trying to defend Amway cult and all that. 


So I repeated my comment, that compared to TVI Express, Amway is quite benign. I even pointed him to Robert L. Fitzpatrick's "False Profits" blog. That's a real anti-pyramid crusader. 


That's not enough to appease David Brear though. He claims I was being condescending, that I assumed they don't know about Mr. Fitzpatrick, then goes into some conspiracy about how the US government condones MLM to scam people around the world. Then he links up religious right to the MLM industry. 


Frankly, I have NO position on Amway. It has been operating legally in the US (and elsewhere) for DECADES. What Amway does in INDIA, frankly, is none of my business. I have not studied Amway in any way, shape, or form, except peripherally as part of studying up on TVI Express, and how TVI Express scam CANNOT be multi-level marketing. As Amway basically defined what is legal MLM in the US, I know it "somewhat", nowhere well enough to defend against Mr. Brear's tirade that essentially said "you're either with us (i.e. against Amway) or against us."


So why can't Mr. Brear see that we're on the SAME SIDE, AGAINST FRAUD AND ABUSE? What's with the "you're with us or against us" attitude? 


What Mr. Brear have... is a reading comprehension problem. 


I wrote that Amway *can* be operated ethically, by selling stuff, and ignore the cultish ways like buying all those training packages and recruiting people. (You can recruit a few who are good marketers / sellers) and I meant that. 


However, it appears that Mr. Brear didn't read that. What he actually read was "Amway IS ethical", which is clearly NOT what I wrote. I am well aware of some of the accusations regarding Amway "cult" and related companies,like Quixtar, as one cannot help to read some when searching for MLM abuse examples. Confession: I *have* been recruited for Quixtar and I refused. They are horribly annoying. 


Thus, please drop that "you're with me or against me" attitude. It makes you sound like a fanatic. 

Related articles

• Amway, Fortune High-Tech, and Pyramid Schemes (lordsetar.wordpress.com)
• Amway settles suit, to replace $20M in gift cards (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Business based on tricking people

The only business that relies on tricking people is magicians. Anybody else, and we call them crooks, and put them in jail.

Except the guys who manage to toe a fine line between warning you not to be stupid, and make you fall for the scam any way.

Here's one example... In California, every corporation incorporated here have to file an annual "minutes" with $25 processing fee that basically updates the government on how your corporation is doing, and who are responsible. Here is one such form:



However, there are some "legal scammers" out there that want to do the same work, except charge you $75 more, for a total of $100. But you do all the work any way, since you get to fill out THEIR version of the form, all the same info. They just copy your info onto a real form, and pocket the extra $75 you sent in. Sounds like easy work, doesn't it? Here's such a form:



He's making money even if he got a response of just 1% (i.e. only 1 out of 100 fall for this "legal scam"). Yikes, too bad real businesses don't profit like that.