this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2025
423 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

72669 readers
3540 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 221 points 2 days ago (4 children)

We literally cannot have even one nice thing in this country. You best start believin' in cyberpunk dystopias... because you're in one.

[–] sic_semper_tyrannis@lemmy.today 18 points 2 days ago

Especially with all the talk of Transhumanism getting more common

[–] dan69@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Most likely I’ll have to snail mail an unsubscribe to subscription with a check won’t I?

[–] y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I wonder if replying to a "do not reply" email 1000 times a second would have any ill effect in their servers.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

Likely not. Many times the address doesn’t even have a mailbox, so it immediately bounces. If you reply enough to actually have an effect, you’ll either be blacklisted, or reported as spam.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 1 points 16 hours ago

Best you can do is report spam. If enough do that, it’ll give their IT dep a headache.

[–] DJKJuicy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 17 hours ago

I expected nothing yet I'm still disappointed...

[–] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 60 points 2 days ago (3 children)

the FTC had failed to follow correct procedures and conduct an analysis before issuing the rule

The FTC is free to issue this again. They need to do it in accordance with the law next time.

[–] limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 63 points 2 days ago

The current ftc doing something constructive?

Most likely situation is that this will not happen now, or years from now

[–] Hackworth@sh.itjust.works 32 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

industry associations and individual businesses [...] argued the FTC had failed to follow correct procedures and conduct an analysis before issuing the rule. The judge panel has agreed with them.

Three judges — two appointed by President Trump, one by President George H. W. Bush — found that the FTC’s rulemaking process was flawed and did not include early analysis of the rule’s possible economic effects. [1]

"the law"

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

"the grift"

[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 days ago

This was their last chance to do anything before they’re gutted. Guess we deal with the wave of bullshit now.

what a shocker trump fucking over everyone again

[–] r0ertel@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is the FTC's rule, but nothing prevents each and every state from implementing a law to do the exact same thing, except slightly differently than every other state, making it extremely costly for the companies to implement.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The problem with subscription services is that it's fairly easy to argue it's interstate commerce that states don't have jurisdiction over.

[–] AngryRobot@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

That would also invalidate all of the porn site ID laws.

[–] r0ertel@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

States have argued successfully to tax cross state commerce. That's why you get charged local sales tax even when ordering from a company that does not have a presence in your state. I don't see this as any different, but someone will need to go first to set the precedent.

[–] DJKJuicy@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was really hoping this would go into effect so I could sign up for a gym membership. I'll never sign up with a gym again...Their cancellation processes are offensive and predatory.

The "click-to-cancel" rule would force gyms to allow you to cancel your gym membership as easily as you signed up for it.

For some reason these businesses are against losing the free money they get for making it hard to cancel subscriptions.

It's been a law in Germany for three years now:

German Online Cancel Button Law

[–] MetalMachine@feddit.nl 5 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

For those who worry about this and other services like this, privacy.com is the solution.

You basically create virtual credit cards with an amount limit. At any point you can cancel the credit card and not worry about all the hoops you need to cancel.

[–] alphabethunter@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago

Yeah, this is the way to go these days. My bank offers this feature in app, and I have a separate virtual credit card for each service. All I need to do to cancel a service/subscription is to cancel that credit card. Good luck trying to get more money from me. This is especially useful for those "free trials", sign up with a credit card that deletes itself after 24h, and bye bye.

[–] DJKJuicy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

This is great advice for signing up for streaming services, and very, very bad advice for a gym membership.

They absolutely will send your delinquent gym membership account to collections and it will wind up on your credit report. It's part of their business plan.

You'd have to sign up with a false identity, which is technically fraud.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 18 points 2 days ago

Just for that I'm going to put things in my Amazon and eBay accounts and just keep swapping stuff without buying anything for weeks at a time.

They doing any of this analysis on anything the current administration is up to?

[–] thedarkenedwing@piefed.social 15 points 2 days ago

So per the latest Supreme Court ruling, this only applies to that explicit case then, right?.... Right?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

Well it's good to know that the courts are willing to tell the executive they can't do things. Shame about it only applying when the feds are helping ordinary people

[–] lukaro@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago

I'd expect the Spanish inquisition long before I expect the government to do something good for the people.

[–] y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago

Doesn't that ONLY apply to whatever circuit it's in?

[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 hours ago

Every single opportunity, however petty, to ensure we become more miserable evwry day.