Anyone can get scammed online, including the generation of Americans that grew up with the internet.

If you’re part of Generation Z — that is, born sometime between the late 1990s and early 2010s — you or one of your friends may have been the target or victim of an online scam. In fact, according to a recent Deloitte survey, members of Gen Z fall for these scams and get hacked far more frequently than their grandparents do.

Compared to older generations, younger generations have reported higher rates of victimization in phishing, identity theft, romance scams, and cyberbullying. The Deloitte survey shows that Gen Z Americans were three times more likely to get caught up in an online scam than boomers were (16 percent and 5 percent, respectively). Compared to boomers, Gen Z was also twice as likely to have a social media account hacked (17 percent and 8 percent). Fourteen percent of Gen Z-ers surveyed said they’d had their location information misused, more than any other generation. The cost of falling for those scams may also be surging for younger people: Social Catfish’s 2023 report on online scams found that online scam victims under 20 years old lost an estimated $8.2 million in 2017. In 2022, they lost $210 million.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    39 months ago

    Both are totally legitimate interpretations. It doesn’t specify what they’re talking about beyond “people in China” which can either mean individually or collectively. It’s meant to be a trick question, though, which is why it’s worded so ambiguously.

    • @[email protected]
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      “people in China” does not mean the same thing as " the Chinese populace".

      People in China means consider the individual experience of a person, then generalize.

      It does not mean “as a cumulative total”

        • @[email protected]
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -19 months ago

          Cool, but that’s not how semantic coding works. I know it’s popular to say “language evolves” but logical Grammer means something still.