Former NASA Engineer Designed Glitter Bomb Trap To Avenge Amazon Delivery Theft Victims (cnbc.com) 468
They say revenge is a dish best served cold. But for Mark Rober, it's much sweeter served smart, smelly and covered in glitter. From a report: The former NASA engineer-turned-YouTube star has received plaudits online after designing a booby trap to avenge all those who've fallen victim to a new wave of neighborhood crime: doorstep delivery theft. Rober spent six months combining GPS tracking, cameras, fart spray and glitter in an elaborate and amusing mechanism after discovering thieves had stolen an Amazon delivery from his doorstep.
In a video posted on his channel, the 38-year-old, who helped design the U.S. space agency's Curiosity Rover, said his engineering experience left him well-placed to "take a stand" after dismissive police left him feeling "powerless." "If anyone was going to make a revenge ... package and over-engineer the crap out of it, it was going to be me," said Rober, who spent nine years with NASA.
In a video posted on his channel, the 38-year-old, who helped design the U.S. space agency's Curiosity Rover, said his engineering experience left him well-placed to "take a stand" after dismissive police left him feeling "powerless." "If anyone was going to make a revenge ... package and over-engineer the crap out of it, it was going to be me," said Rober, who spent nine years with NASA.
but why ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do people find it acceptable that valuable packages are just left on the doorstep ? Where I live, the delivery guys ring the door bell, hands over the package, and takes my name and signature as proof of delivery.
What happens if the package gets stolen ? Does UPS pay you back ?
Re:but why ? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Another reason that Amazon is taking over: better customer service.
Hahahaha... oh wait, were you serious? Their customer service has gotten markedly worse over the past 1-2 years.
Just look at the extra steps you need to go through now to report a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:but why ? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's acceptable because no one is home to receive the package.
Sometimes I have packages sent to work, but inevitably they'll try for a Saturday or Sunday delivery so it's a bit of game of roulette. Sometimes I send them to my retired parents' address who have a greater chance of being home, but they live thirty miles away and their home is even more exposed if they're not around to receive the packages directly, so it's also imperfect.
I'd like to see the United States Postal Inspection Service, a law-enforcement entity in its own right, expanded to cover these sorts of crimes even if the shipper is not the USPS, and for the crime of stealing packages to have the same penalties as exists for stealing mail.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see the United States Postal Inspection Service, a law-enforcement entity in its own right, expanded to cover these sorts of crimes even if the shipper is not the USPS, and for the crime of stealing packages to have the same penalties as exists for stealing mail.
It does...when it's the postal service. USPIS doesn't have any say over FedEx or UPS. Additionally, as someone who's day job involves a shit ton of shipping to end users, people assume that they're never going to have this issue come up. I make it a point to try to ship to hold locations, especially now that FedEx has one inside pretty much every Walgreens, for any products that are extremely valuable and they can't be home to sign for it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's acceptable because no one is home to receive the package.
That does NOT make it acceptable to simply leave a package in full view of the street.
Re: (Score:3)
Then we'd all appreciate you coming over here and explaining that to all the package delivery companies. They do not believe what you believe.
Re:but why ? (Score:5, Informative)
It's not always because nobody is home. Some delivery drivers are either too lazy or too overworked to ring a doorbell and wait for an answer. I've been home many times knowing that a package was going to be delivered only to receive a "delivered" text message without a doorbell ringing. I look outside and the package is there, easy prey for a package thief.
Occasionally, I've had things delivered that require signatures. With some delivery companies, this will result in an automatic "sorry we missed you" note on the door and me needing to drive down to the local center to get the package - even if I was home at the time. No ringed doorbell or anything. The driver just prints out a quick "missed you" note and sticks it to the door rather than "waste time" ringing the doorbell and waiting the 1 minute for me to get to the door and sign his pad. (Yes, we've complained and no nothing changed.)
Re:but why ? (Score:5, Informative)
Hah! Where I live, I can be standing at the window looking at the FedEx guy as he runs up, puts a "no one home" sticker on the door and scurries away. That's assuming he got the right house in the first place. UPS just drops the package at the front door. My girlfriend's present was left like that. We're in the house and later I step outside for something and there's the package :)
[John]
Re: (Score:3)
Shipping companies did the math, and determined that under a certain value it's cheaper to just leave the package and pay for the occasional stolen one than it is to attempt re-delivery.
The shipper can stipulate that someone must sign for the package and that the carrier can't just leave it. As the receiver you can waive this in advance, but then you assume the liability of the package getting stolen.
Re: (Score:3)
Why do people find it acceptable that valuable packages are just left on the doorstep ?
Chances are they are making the same risk/reward decision that you are, but they live in a slightly less dodgy neighborhood.
When I lived in NYC, there is no way in hell they would have left a package on a doorstep. Out in suburbia, it is common. This is simply because the risk/reward ratio is different. I was lucky and my building had a doorman - but for people without that luxury, ordering stuff online can be a lot less convenient. Amazon does reimburse you for stolen packages... I had a roll of duct tape
Re:but why ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do people find it acceptable that valuable packages are just left on the doorstep ?
Because we like to live in a world where we feel safe without having to take extra precautions. There are still places where people don't lock their doors and leave their keys in their cars in case a neighbor needs to borrow it in an emergency.
That should be the standard, not an exception.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. I'm glad I live in an area where one house doesn't even close the garage door at night. I've been to the store and somebody left their lights on, but the windows down so I reached in and helped them out by turning off their lights so they didn't come back to a dead battery. The real shame is that we find it acceptable to live in a world where we have to assume there are assholes and thieves everywhere.
Re: (Score:3)
The real crime is that the because of the War on Drugs US police forces won't even attempt to pursue property crime.
It's simply not profitable enough to the police when they can spend all their police time setting up drug stings and seizing everyone's personal property to keep for themselves.
This is the consequence of for profit policing that the insane civil forfeiture laws created.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I (and everyone I work with) get packages delivered to work, where there are people's whose job it is to sign for such, and get it to the right person. Not everyone can do that, of course, but it's generally pretty easy to find some kind of alternative to leaving it on the doorstep.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do people find it acceptable that valuable packages are just left on the doorstep ?
Because paying someone to make repeated attempts at delivery costs money, and the shipping companies charge that back to the customer for requiring a signature.
It's "acceptable" because for most items, the collective cost of the signature service is probably more than then collective cost of shipping replacements.
If it's costing you an extra $2 each for 10k packages a day, you need to lose $20k to theft before it makes sense to switch to requiring signatures for everything. It would probably take a 5% theft
Re: (Score:3)
Why do people find it acceptable that valuable packages are just left on the doorstep ?
Because you shouldn't have to worry about someone stealing from you, even if it's out in the open.
Why do people find it acceptable for the police to not investigate these crimes? Hopefully the GPS and video evidence is enough to persuade them to press charges this time. However, I suspect the police are too concerned with crimes that generate revenue for the department, like traffic violations.
Re: (Score:3)
It's telling that so many comments refer to the chance that he'll be sued... while the cops don't care about addressing the crime even with the GPS and the camera video of the thief.
Re: (Score:3)
Where I live, the delivery guys ring the door bell, hands over the package, and takes my name and signature as proof of delivery.
Where I live, delivery services have to run throughout the day to get everything delivered, and not many people either work from home or sit around at their house all day waiting for deliveries.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to get home more.
Re: (Score:3)
Because most people live in populated areas, and in any population there's always a few assholes willing to steal, especially if it's easy and doesn't involve confrontation with the victim or breaking and entering.
Saw it this morning (Score:3)
The only thing I could think of to make it better would be to have a small CO2 canister (like for BB guns), which sends the glitter flying everywhere rather than just around the box.
Other than that, maybe something even more smelly.
Re:Saw it this morning (Score:5, Interesting)
Where I live, one neighbor has gotten better. He put a package connected to a wire with a perimeter alarm [exoticammo.com] on it. Thieves tend to run when they hear a gunshot when they try to boost a package, and it gets neighbors to see what is going on. The alarm is harmless but loud, and legal in all 50 states.
Re:Saw it this morning (Score:4, Interesting)
I would like to see it start shouting "PACKAGE THIEF!" or something else equally loudly that can't be easily turned off, but it would probably end up smashed until it stopped emitting.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather see the indelible dye packets that banks use, but that's probably a bit overboard.
Re: (Score:2)
Rather than the fart smell, how about some cheap perfume. Let the porch pirates explain that to their girlfriends. (One of the thieves was muttering about how his girlfriend would be wondering who was in his car)
Sales Opportunity (Score:5, Funny)
He should sell these on Amazon.
Re: (Score:3)
And then they get delivered and stolen ?
Re: (Score:2)
Very considerate (Score:3)
Others would have rigged some tear gas canister or an explosive device with a few handfuls of shrapnel. Glitter and fart spray is effective enough and at the same time whimsical enough to get away with it.
Novel Approach (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect he might have achieved better spread and more glitter using a small CO2 cylinder. Maybe in 2.0.
Doubtful. The device looks similar to a broadcast spreader, [familyhandyman.com] which is where I'm guessing he got his inspiration. There's a reason that design is popular for landscaping. It achieves very even results. A CO2 cylinder would likely result in a shotgun pattern, which will end up covering a much smaller area.
Biting back... with a sign (Score:5, Insightful)
More booby-trapped packages in general might dissuade casual thieves. Ditto for law enforcement.
Meanwhile, thanks for doing the hard work and getting the publicity, Mark. Now, all I have to do to discourage theft is to put up a sign that says "Warning: packages may explode" with suitable graphic.
Seriously, what happened to the police's "broken windows" policy? I thought they were now supposed to investigate and prosecute small offenses like this to a) create a culture of obeying the law, and b) make citizens feel like the cops have their backs so they don't go vigilante. Which is what happened in this case.
Problem is that packages are exposed. (Score:2)
A lot of the solutions seem to involve giving Amazon drivers access to your home (shudder), or a heavy metal dropbox with keys and the like ... I find myself wondering if you'd solve 90% or more of the problem by simply having a box to dump things in without any sort of smarts or security. These people come by and see a package, and then are in-and-out quickly. They presumably aren't as interested in walking up and digging around on your porch three times a day just in case there's a package.
Of course, de
Why not used by police? (Score:2)
In my city, package theft, bike theft, car break ins are rampant. The police, no surprise, say that the are too busy with working more important crimes. This, though overall crime is way down (use this state chart as a place holder https://www.ppic.org/publicati... [ppic.org]) and, again no surprise, the hiring of police officers is way up.
Why can't the police do a similar thing as this guy? Maybe without the glitter and and fart spray, but perhaps something similar to dye packs used in banks, though less powerful.
I'm honestly sad.. (Score:2)
...that we live in a society where ambushing these pieces of shit is punished. You should be able to beat them with, say, up to a broom-handle.
I mean, no, I don't think it's justified to go all the way to kill them (although let's be clear: they're the sort of human trash that prevents us from having nice things), but honestly a booby-trap that blinds/maims them would be entirely justified in my book.
I guarantee you that these sorts of opportunistic thefts would decrease significantly.
Re:I'm honestly sad.. (Score:5, Insightful)
These people have already been beaten, or they wouldn't have wound up as thieves. Let's find a way to help them before they fall to this level instead of beating them down afterwards.
Bull fucking shit. A lot of people are just bad regardless of what happened to them (or didn't), their socio-economic status, etc. Some people would rather steal than earn something. Quit pretending that everyone who does this was somehow a victim first -- that's naive nonsense at best. This isn't anywhere remotely like the "stealing bread to feed my starving family" cliche -- it's opportunistic twats cowardly stealing from others who are out working. Anyone who does this absolutely deserves a solid ass kicking, at a minimum.
Re: (Score:3)
You should be able to beat them with, say, up to a broom-handle.
These people have already been beaten, or they wouldn't have wound up as thieves.
They look pretty well-off to me. Have you even seen the video?
Let's find a way to help them before they fall to this level instead of beating them down afterwards.
What level? They're smartly dressed, have $1000 bikes in their houses and drive non-fucked-up cars.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Well... given he’s attempting to be a YouTube star, he probably thinks that any publicity is good publicity.
I have to admit, when I see a “YouTube star” claiming to be a “former NASA engineer”, my first assumption is he actually shlepped technical drawings around between departments - or was in charge of keeping their monitors clean.
Re:One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:5, Informative)
I have to admit, when I see a “YouTube star” claiming to be a “former NASA engineer”, my first assumption is he actually shlepped technical drawings around between departments - or was in charge of keeping their monitors clean.
His Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org] suggests he's a proper engineer: he has a Mechanical Engineering degree and a Masters (presumably in a related field), and he worked at JPL for 9 years, 7 of which were spent working on Curiosity.
Prior to this video, my wife and I had stumbled on a handful of his videos over the years. He's clearly a smart guy who is interested in making science and technology more fun and accessible to a wide audience. The sort of person who is capable of inspiring kids to pursue STEM. While we don't subscribe to his channel or seek his videos out, we've enjoyed the videos of his that have popped up as recommendations.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Congrats on finding someone who lets you penetrate their holes"
Well, you're obviously not married!
Re: (Score:3)
Thanks! I'd have counted myself fortunate to simply meet someone of such outstanding character, beauty, integrity, humor, and intellect as my wife. Instead, however, I got to marry her. Not only that, but she's from a wonderful family. How many people actually get to say that they have great relationships with their in-laws and look forward to when they visit? Not many, from my experience, yet I'm able to do so. I'm an incredibly fortunate man.
I don't drop "my wife and I" into every post, like you're sugges
Re: (Score:3)
Deliberate ignorance is the dumbest ignorance.
Re: (Score:3)
I love that nobody seems to be annoyed that the thieves really have no legal risk, whereas Mr Rober is extremely vulnerable.
It seems to me with as much reach as he does, he could at least make single statement about that.
Re: One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:2)
I love that nobody seems to be annoyed that the thieves really have no legal risk
What about the risk of getting shot? Not every state criminalizes the defending of oneself or ones property.
Re: (Score:3)
So, essentially, you get your stuff stolen and can do nothing about it.
Also, Mr. Rober did not send the package trough the mail, he just put a fake shipping label (even addressed to the two thieves in Home Alone) and placed it on the steps to his door.
What looks more weird to me is that the delivery people would just put your item in the open, no need to sign for it etc. In my country, if the item is delivered to the door, someone from that address have to pick it up and sign for it. If the item is sent tro
Re: (Score:2)
They are holding the evidence GUILTY here....should have shown their faces for the world to see....perhaps even the lazy police might even have recognized a few of them.
Sham he couldn't put something a bit more punishing in there than glitter and fart smell.
Re: (Score:3)
The faces were probably pixelated because YouTube will take-down any video which features someone who did not agree to be in it -- if they lodge a complaint.
I've had this happen to one of my videos because someone, who was being a real arse, didn't want to be seen being a "real arse" so they complained.
No point in making a viral video if someone in it can have it pulled with a single complaint.
Re: (Score:3)
Or they were pixelated because it was all staged, and they were his buddies who agreed to act in his film.
Re: (Score:3)
The faces were probably pixelated because YouTube will take-down any video which features someone who did not agree to be in it -- if they lodge a complaint.
Complete BS.
Otherwise every person in just about every news story seen on youtube must have signed a release. Which they clearly didn't.
GP: "if they lodge a complaint"
You: "they must have signed a release"
Point: above head
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder why he "pixellated' the faces out of the criminals he caught on film here?
[...]
Sham he couldn't put something a bit more punishing in there than glitter and fart smell.
He pixelated their faces for the same reason that he can't spray them with purple dye — their commission of a crime doesn't excuse his. They are innocent until proven guilty in court, and showing their faces would create bias and is also a use of their likeness without their permission. While it seems to me that he would have a defense against such claims, IANAL and also why set yourself up for potential legal hassles beyond what's already possible due to glitter and farts?
perhaps even the lazy police might even have recognized a few of them.
Probably not, but if that's
Re: One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:3)
Unless you live in California where criminals have more rights than you or I do, any judge you bring this to is going to laugh you right out of court. Then they are going to arrest you.
Yes, your honor, I not only tresspassed upon private property, but I also engaged in criminal behavior by stealing items from said location.
Upon opening the package, I was covered in glitter against my will and the inside of my car smells like shit.
I would like to press charg. . . why are you laughing at me ?
Yes, your honor,
Mostly Harmless (Score:2)
I think he's pretty safe - he could always claim he left it out as a prank for a friend, and the thief got in the way. For something like this intent would matter.
Also he was smart in that it spread the glitter horizontally, not upward - again not putting it into the face of whoever opened the box.
The funny thing to me is that the thieves did have something pretty valuable since it had four phones with service plans, if they'd juts literally held their nose they could have had a bounty.
Re: Mostly Harmless (Score:5, Insightful)
he could always claim he left it out as a prank for a friend, and the thief got in the way
Not any more he can't.
They also have no claim (Score:2)
Right - not anymore. But the people in the video also have shown they are not hurt at all so they couldn't claim harm at this point...
I'm talking more for future scenarios if someone would be liable if one o the thieves held onto the device and wanted to sue.
Re: Mostly Harmless (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the problem is this guy's an engineer (Score:3)
And yes, this is why we can't have nice things. People are stupid on both sides of the isle.
Re: I think the problem is this guy's an engineer (Score:3)
" If that keeps up sooner or later some dumb ass is gonna put an M-80 or something in a box and kill somebody. "
Live like a criminal, die like one. They won't be missed.
Re: One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe shouldnt be stealijg peoples packages then.
What if the package that was stolen had peanut butter in it and the person was deathly alergic ? Think they are going to be able to sue then ? No. THEY STOLE IT !.
You break the law, live with the consiquences.
Re: (Score:2)
How about something like Anthrax....and just take a few thieves/criminals out of the gene pool and be done with it?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd prefer gentian violet. Non-toxic, unless you're a fungus. But stains things purple (not a pleasant purple) and is quite difficult to remove. On skin you normally need to let new skin grow to replace the skin that got stained. But it's harmless even if it gets in your eyes.
Re:One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:4, Interesting)
The glitter being thrown about the car is definitely a danger to eyes as well as the respiratory system,
A valid complaint, although much lessened by the use of a thrower instead of a gas capsule.
the chemicals in the fart spray could trigger anaphylactic shock.
[citation needed]
I know this is a problem with some ingredients, and with some propellants... show us that it's a credible threat in this case.
I think the bigger problem is the thing went off (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
MagnaVolt! [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. As much as I think the package thief SHOULDN'T have a case, the American legal system is messed up. There have been instances of burglers breaking into homes, being injured, and suing the homeowner. This should be a case of "if you are injured in the process of committing an illegal act you have no recourse", but it - at best - turns into legal fees/hassles for the victimized homeowner and - at worst - can result in the homeowner victim needing to pay the thief.
So wh
Revenge isn't Justice. (Score:3)
I think with the above argument there is the idea the Revenge is Justice.
If a thief broke into my house and is stealing $1000 worth of goods, I catch him, and hurt/injure/kill him. Then that is normal self defense, because this guy is unlawfully in my house, I an unable to calculate his risk to my immediate safety.
However after he leave my house with those goods, I cannot hunt him down and hurt/injure/kill him and I would then be guilty of a crime. Because my safety is currently secured, and I would be able
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on where he lives. Some states have laws about suing people for things that happen to you while committing a crime. In California, for instance, yeah, you could sue, but if you win, any money collected from the judgement is automatically seized for the victim restitution's fund - before the lawyers get their cut. Really cuts down on the bullshit.
Re:One big lawsuit waiting to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
The real genius of this device is that it was designed to be funny without causing any kind of serious injury or damage. In fact you can hear some of the thieves on the video laughing. The glitter spreading mechanism is pretty lame; it's like shaking a box of litter around the edge of the box. He could have used a can of compressed air or some kind of pyrotechnic squib to distribute the glitter, and it would end up everywhere, but that includes peoples' eyes.
There are going to be the inevitable suggestions for how to make the device more damaging or dangerous; and the reason this guy didn't do anything like throwing dye or shrapnel isn't that he wasn't clever enough to see the possibilities. He was clever enough to see the weak point in his plans: the thief-turned-victim has your home address. Get too nasty and he might return the favor with a molotov cocktail or even a bullet.
Re: (Score:2)
You fail the see the Genius behind this. Because he is recording it, it is classified as art. You can get away a lot of legal hurdles by calling it Art.
Re: (Score:3)
> that he has set himself up for a huge lawsuit by whomever took the package.
And that is precisely why America is FUCKED.
Victim: I got tired of MY packages being stolen so I booby trapped them
Thief: I'm suing for emotional distress.
Victim: WTF!?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While I applaud Mr. Rober, I would think that he has set himself up for a huge lawsuit by whomever took the package.
Had you read his design info you would know he is more than fine with that.
If you watched the video even you would hear him imply that is desired.
To press a civil suit, the thief would need to admit to a felony criminal act and would be punished, which is all this guy wanted in the first place.
He also spent significant time building the thing. It's perfectly reasonable he would be willing to spend at least up to that much time going to the court to defend himself since that means the thief is 100% going to
Re: (Score:3)
Yep - just $500-$1000 for felony (Score:2)
Yep, felony theft limit varies by state, but is just $500 to $1000 - even if those are cheaper Android phones that package probably goes over the limit.
So you can claim damages, but also get a felony theft rap... hmm.
If someone already had a felony theft charge previously though, I wonder if it would be as much a deterrent.
Re: (Score:2)
If someone already had a felony theft charge previously though, I wonder if it would be as much a deterrent.
Three strikes...?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you in Europe or somewhere else with a Civil Law system?
In the US, Common Law does not have the Civil Law limitation that no one should benefit from a crime, even the victim, and reparations can exceed the damage, with civil tort laws allowing for substantial remuneration for things like infringement on rights and emotional distress.
Re: (Score:3)
How is this "negligence"?
And (b) You think any of those people are going to go to the police to explain what happened?
Re: (Score:2)
I had a friend who was sued by the robber who broke into hi house, then injured himself seriously by walking through the plate glass of the patio door. He won the lawsuit, for a considerable sum. We just love our lawsuits in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
This may depend on the jurisdiction, but I believe there's precedence for "anything bad that happens during/as a result of the commission of a crime is the responsibility of the person committing the crime."
If not then anybody could go around breaking windows and claim they cut their hand on your dangerous glass window.
(or any number of other frivolous damage claims)
Re: (Score:2)
If not then anybody could go around breaking windows and claim they cut their hand on your dangerous glass window.
(or any number of other frivolous damage claims)
A friend of mine was sued by a robber for pretty much that. Fortunately, he had liability protection with his homeowners insurance.
Re: (Score:2)
A friend of mine was sued by a robber for pretty much that. Fortunately, he had liability protection with his homeowners insurance.
So a burgler went to the police to complain that he hurt himself while burgling a house?
Surely he'd need to take the police to the scene of the accident and explain how it happened.
Where do you live?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that simple. Anti-climb paint, for example, is only legal most places if you put up warning signs. That someone is breaking the law by climbing your fence doesn't remove your responsibility as it adds to his. Guilt is not a finite commodity, and a trespasser being guilty of entering doesn't make you not guilty of causing harm to his property. They are separate crimes.
Revenge is not a legal right, and most booby trap devices are just that, even if relatively harmless.
Re: (Score:3)
In this particular case, worth it.
Though I wish that there was a practical means of spraying out ground-up crayon wax, something that would embed itself into the fabric and melt into place. Unfortunately it would probably congeal while sitting on the porch.
Re: (Score:2)
Though I wish that there was a practical means of spraying out ground-up crayon wax, something that would embed itself into the fabric and melt into place. Unfortunately it would probably congeal while sitting on the porch.
I was going to suggest peanut butter powder, but ironically, that could actually hurt someone. Ditto my second choice, onion powder. Nobody is allergic to glucose, but it's a hazard to diabetics...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The whole thing is too perfect. Fake.
a) You think it's difficult to get a package stolen?
b) We didn't see all the videos that didn't make the grade.
Re:Fake (Score:4, Informative)
Except if you watch Rober's other videos, he actually debunks other fake videos on YouTube that go viral. I guarantee you this video is legit. He is an engineer superhero.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I love when the trolling is deep enough that people rate it "Informative".
Re: (Score:2)
UPS/FedEx both give the shipper the option to require a signature for delivery. Upon not being able to deliver within the first 3 days, they'll hold at local location for another 3 business days.
That all being said, my USPS delivery person has been dropping packages off as much or more than the FedEx/UPS guys, so not sure what you're referencing there.
Also, as someone who ships multi-thousand dollar shipments on the regular that are not simple sizes, I would never give the client the option of USPS for the
Re: (Score:3)
I see we have a neo-liberal mod out modding everything down as troll here. Don't have to bring race into though as I've seen plenty of webcams where the thieves are white. This one was.
It's not trolling, it's historically accurate. Most civilian recourse against any kind of home invading criminal is treated as vigilantism and is often viewed more harshly than the original crime, by bleeding hearts judges. You can't booby trap your own property. And there are a lot of messed up people out there who think i