you discovered the importance of multiple non-associated fact checking institutions holding one another accountable :)

fiduciary duty requires that directors of corporations protect the interests of shareholders’ investments—including maximizing profits where reasonable and within the bounds of the law.

even if technically illegal on paper (which i’m not sure it is), so long as there is no enforcement or accountability, t-mobile and similar entities have literally no reason do do better. they are literally just holding up their end of the law.

in other words, this unfair treatment isn’t just one of many unfortunate flukes. it is literally baked into the system as a requirement.

thanks, genuinely lmao. the trolls have discovered they can throw around the word “troll” for fun now i guess 😭

genuinely huh? why must you be so unkind i just shared my thoughts based on knowledge of the past :/ this site is so nasty sometimes

deleted by creator

it will be interesting to see how apple tries to instill consumer trust for doing something technally less secure than microsoft’s on-device copilot garbage (which was kind of a PR failure as we all know). as always, apple knows when to innovate and knows when to follow the leader

don’t get me wrong, both companies are profit seeking entities but it’s always impressive how apple uses marketing to pull off parallel implementations with 99% less uproar. in my view, articles like this are a grassroots of what it’s planning to maximize support

edit: to be more clear this is an apple enthusiast comment; i am inspired/in awe by apple’s marketing talent and product strategy. i am just highly critical of the AI trend going around

only works on purpose built “Copilot” devices and looks to be disabled by default

definitely funky but not as bad as other AI moves that users didn’t get to chose whether it showed up

Looks up ur modlog.

Repeated warning comment removals before finally being banned for repeated violations

Pardon me for not feeling much sympathy friend.

i don’t know dawg im just presenting the info the mods gave me 😭

who on earth said terrorism? bwahaha

Ooh thanks for the step by step. I was able to identify the one kbin user who downvoted me over the past 24 hours. 😜

Yeah, given this I won’t recommend that kbin users downvote just anything since the platform doesn’t protect their privacy. Lemmy users should be good tho. Thanks! 😊

make better jokes imho 😛

there is no rule 5 dawg

Thanks for the example.

Kbin users seeing who downvotes their posts is potentially an issue, but I don’t want to discourage downvoting bad or harmful content for just that reason. The end goal is that bad content gets removed and offending users acted on. So if a Kbin user is abusing the system to harrass or abuse, they should likewise reported and banned.

Yeah I agree, I think that you might be just applying your correct opinion to the wrong conversation 👍

thread that explains it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/8694944

I think the key is to take whatever space is necessary not to make the problem worse for mods. None of those verbs are requirements but rather suggestions to improve the quality of your report.

I welcome any changes to the language to make that more clear though for sure. 👍

I would push back and say that if something is already so bad it’s worth reporting, it’s not weaponization to also simply downvote.

Unless you were already weaponizing the report feature which is pretty much not a good thing lol.

Some instances allow a poster to see exactly who downvoted them.

Source or example? 😧 This is new to me.

Encouraging downvotes was a suggestion from the mods, but I will take this into account.

It’s probably not so much an oversight as a natural consequence of the open nature of Lemmy. Same reason DMs on here are not technically private. Even if you implemented an anonymous report feature, instance admins could probably identify the user easily.