this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
383 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

67050 readers
3742 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
 

A Visible customer was recently the victim of what seems to be a misunderstanding of the company's automated spam detection system. According to the user, after working with customer service to reactivate an account, the response from the company alleged that the deactivation was due to the account being flagged for excessive text messaging — or spam, as that is against the company's terms and conditions.

However, there is one problem: the user states this wasn't spam, but rather they were responding "STOP" to a barrage of unsolicited political messages. This situation has highlighted a potential conflict between automated spam detection systems and legitimate user responses, especially in the context of increasing political text messaging.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 113 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Weird that their system doesn't flag the flood of political spam, if all it takes is one person replying stop a few times

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Typically something like a political campaign will use a dedicated texting service intended to send out mass texts. They're not copy/pasting them on a consumer level cell phone account.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Geez, I wonder why....

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

There might be laws against it like there is for mail?

For instance, you can't opt out of mail from your member of parliament here, nor political ads that happen around election.

[–] [email protected] 135 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Hindsight is 20/20 but this could have been avoided by just not replying and blocking the number instead. Replying "STOP" just verifies that it's a good phone number and that you're reading their texts. Then they collect that information and sell it to other spammers.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Exactly what I do. Don’t respond and I just block and report.

I do the same for phone calls from unknown numbers. I just press the volume button to mute the ringer and let it time out. If you hang up or pickup you get added to the list as active.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I've been using the 'Silence' app, which lets only known-callers ring your phone. The rest get sent straight to voicemail

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I use that app to block area codes near my phone number since I moved far away from where I lived when I got this number.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Problem with that is there may be other services that also leverage the same short code, meaning you may be blocking something you need in the future.

Edit: apparently according to Twilio:

Shared short codes are not permitted in the US and Canada or in most countries worldwide.

The only (very narrow) exception to the prohibition on shared short codes that is permitted by US/Canada carriers is a short code that sends OTP (one-time passwords) or authentication codes with strict adherence to a template, and no option for customization by the brands that are sharing the short code.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I’m pretty sure the US has a law that requires people to stop texting you after you send STOP. Additionally, service providers like Amazon will just remove subscriptions if they receive a STOP.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 4 days ago (1 children)

That would be really useful if the people behind these texts were subject to US laws.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago

Or STOP meant "stop," not "yes daddy give me more texts"

[–] [email protected] 40 points 4 days ago (2 children)

the US has a law

Laws? What about them? We don't follow laws here anymore.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago

To be fair, we only selectively enforced them before. And now we selectively enforce... worse shit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Can't remember ever hearing about spam calls being prosecuted. And judging by the volume I think its fair to assume they never are.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago
[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 days ago

This is Not the Onion territory.

If only we had regulations...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago

Send goatse and block.