| |
| ▲ | cj 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | I feel like humans would be better at hyper targeting. AI agents have the benefit of working at scale, probably "better" used for mass targeting. | | |
| ▲ | mikert89 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | this like is saying email marketing is done better if you hand write every email. Thats true, but the hit rate is so low, that you are better off generating 1 million hyper personalized emails and firing them off into the ether | | |
| ▲ | mcmcmc 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | As someone who did the former for a couple years, “better off” is subjective and dependent on your business model, particularly for B2B. It’s a trade off like anything else. You may get more leads, but they may convert at a lower rate. Sending at that scale also increases your risk of email deliverability problems. Trashing your domain has more impacts than you’d think. In smaller, targeted markets it even can damage your business reputation and hurt future sales if done poorly; word gets around. | |
| ▲ | cj 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If you’re targeting a million people, I wouldn’t consider that a hyper targeted attack. But I get your point. |
| |
| ▲ | freedomben 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I disagree. Many humans are phishing in a different language than their native tongue, and LLMs are way better at sounding legit/professional than many of them. The best spear-phishing will still be humans, but AI definitely raises the bar. |
|
|
