3 ms·

I think that issuing an ultimatum where if the person does not do what you want, that you will be sharing your concerns with likeminded people online, with the

I think that issuing an ultimatum where if the person does not do what you want, that you will be sharing your concerns with likeminded people online, with the underlying implication being that the business owner will end up experiencing some kind of negative outcome from that, is absolutely a threat.

jlarocco 10d ago
Okay, but I (and I suspect a lot of people) really don't care if somebody is threatened in that way. If the business person doesn't want other people to know what they're doing then maybe they shouldn't do it. It's not worthy of a news article, IMO. If somebody threatens them with violence (which is what "threat" is usually implying) then that's a different thing entirely.
- fakedang 10d ago
  "It would be a pity if I were to tarnish jlarocco's reputation within my network. I even have his GitHub from his profile. I'll just talk shit about him to all the CTOs on the block and ensure he doesn't get a job again..." See how that works? That's why you should care. The so-called influencer-orienter culture has become a plague after social media. And these F&B businesses are the ones hit hardest - remember all those movies in the 90s and 00s about how some up and coming entrepreneur or chef had to win the approval of some hoity-toity food journalist? Also, rest assured, I'm not serious about badmouthing you or anyone here for that matter - just trying to illustrate a point.
  - jlarocco 10d ago
    Oh, I get it, but it only works if the "influencer" can actually influence a large enough group of customers, and my bet is that they can't. If it were me, I would have called their bluff and ignored them.
    - brandon272 10d ago
      In that analogy, you SHOULD assume the person is an influencer. In the case of this shop, we're talking about local retail. If you are a retail small business owner you have to assume that any customer can be an "influencer" and cause significant harm if they seek to trash your business online.
- brandon272 10d ago
  If I tell someone that I am going to take a coordinated effort to undermine their business and get customers to stop shopping there, potentially resulting in the demise of the business, the loss of their livelihood and ability to provide for themselves or their family, I cannot think of any reasonable person who would not categorize that as a threat. A threat by no means is limited to violence only. I am really disturbed by language minimizes concrete actions taken to cause harm. "I am not hurting your business I am just talking to my friends!"
  - jlarocco 10d ago
    Sorry, but the business owner has to own their actions. If they have a large customer base of artists who will feel betrayed by their using AI, then it was a mistake to use it. It's her right to use AI, but the customers also have the right to say they won't patronize businesses who use AI, and are free to tell people they know that the business is using it. If the shop's oat milk was really cow's milk, would it be "threatening their business" to tell other customers that?
    - brandon272 10d ago
      If the "business owner needs to own their actions", shouldn't the people who are seeking to take a coordinated effort to harm that business also "own their actions" and be able to say plainly what they are doing instead of misrepresenting it via "Stop being crazy, I'm not making threats, I'm just talking to my friends" gaslighting nonsense? > If the shop's oat milk was really cow's milk, would it be "threatening their business" to tell other customers that? To entertain this analogy, if a shop is misrepresenting their ingredients then it can make sense to spread the word, particularly if the shop owner refuses to rectify the issue, because there are health implications which represent a legitimate material harm to their customer base and the safety issue takes priority over the shop owner's bottom line. An AI menu, assuming it offers a reasonable representation of what the shop offers, has no safety issue.
      - jlarocco 10d ago
        AI stealing their jobs isn't a "legitimate material harm"? It doesn't matter anyway, because "using AI" doesn't make somebody a protected class. If people don't want to patronize businesses that use AI, there's nothing wrong with that.
- jackb4040 10d ago
  To be fair to the news, there probably wasn't much else happening in Buffalo NY
mothzilla 10d ago
Exactly. Pure cancel culture. Just be humble to understand the world might not agree with your views and let it be. Less "this can't exist" and more of "this is not for me".
- jlarocco 10d ago
  Cancel culture or not, people are allowed to tell other people they know that something is happening, and those people can decide for themselves to patronize the business or not. To call it a threat is really exaggerating. The headline makes it sound like people are phoning in bomb threats and violence, which doesn't seem to be happening at all. Honestly, I think the business owner should have ignored these weak "threats" altogether. It doesn't have anything to do with coffee and it's unlikely they'll get any business because they use AI, so it can only hurt them.
  - jackb4040 10d ago
    If the Montgomery Bus Boycott happened today most Americans would call it cancel culture.
  - mothzilla 10d ago
    I get you think the word is too heavy but remember: it's a small business and bad press is a serious thing. It could be enough to shut down the place. Just see how afraid local shop owners are of Yelp. You get review bombed there and you have a serious problem. You don't know if these artists won't just unload their (just) frustration at AI on the business exactly like that. By judging the tone "change or I'll tell the artists", it's very likely the person would try to incite them instead of just "telling" them.
- thrance 10d ago
  It's not cancel culture to bad-mouth a business and refuse them your patronage. People are vocal about what they feel passionate about, and a world where they weren't or couldn't sounds hellish to me. How would society ever progress? We'd still have "whites only" restaurants in that world. Not saying that justifies all anger targeted at business owners, but a blanket "criticism bad" stance is a bit silly. You have to make an actual argument as to why you think the anti-AI crowd is misguided in this case.

jlarocco 10d ago

Okay, but I (and I suspect a lot of people) really don't care if somebody is threatened in that way. If the business person doesn't want other people to know what they're doing then maybe they shouldn't do it. It's not worthy of a news article, IMO. If somebody threatens them with violence (which is what "threat" is usually implying) then that's a different thing entirely.

fakedang 10d ago
"It would be a pity if I were to tarnish jlarocco's reputation within my network. I even have his GitHub from his profile. I'll just talk shit about him to all the CTOs on the block and ensure he doesn't get a job again..." See how that works? That's why you should care. The so-called influencer-orienter culture has become a plague after social media. And these F&B businesses are the ones hit hardest - remember all those movies in the 90s and 00s about how some up and coming entrepreneur or chef had to win the approval of some hoity-toity food journalist? Also, rest assured, I'm not serious about badmouthing you or anyone here for that matter - just trying to illustrate a point.
- jlarocco 10d ago
  Oh, I get it, but it only works if the "influencer" can actually influence a large enough group of customers, and my bet is that they can't. If it were me, I would have called their bluff and ignored them.
  - brandon272 10d ago
    In that analogy, you SHOULD assume the person is an influencer. In the case of this shop, we're talking about local retail. If you are a retail small business owner you have to assume that any customer can be an "influencer" and cause significant harm if they seek to trash your business online.
brandon272 10d ago
If I tell someone that I am going to take a coordinated effort to undermine their business and get customers to stop shopping there, potentially resulting in the demise of the business, the loss of their livelihood and ability to provide for themselves or their family, I cannot think of any reasonable person who would not categorize that as a threat. A threat by no means is limited to violence only. I am really disturbed by language minimizes concrete actions taken to cause harm. "I am not hurting your business I am just talking to my friends!"
- jlarocco 10d ago
  Sorry, but the business owner has to own their actions. If they have a large customer base of artists who will feel betrayed by their using AI, then it was a mistake to use it. It's her right to use AI, but the customers also have the right to say they won't patronize businesses who use AI, and are free to tell people they know that the business is using it. If the shop's oat milk was really cow's milk, would it be "threatening their business" to tell other customers that?
  - brandon272 10d ago
    If the "business owner needs to own their actions", shouldn't the people who are seeking to take a coordinated effort to harm that business also "own their actions" and be able to say plainly what they are doing instead of misrepresenting it via "Stop being crazy, I'm not making threats, I'm just talking to my friends" gaslighting nonsense? > If the shop's oat milk was really cow's milk, would it be "threatening their business" to tell other customers that? To entertain this analogy, if a shop is misrepresenting their ingredients then it can make sense to spread the word, particularly if the shop owner refuses to rectify the issue, because there are health implications which represent a legitimate material harm to their customer base and the safety issue takes priority over the shop owner's bottom line. An AI menu, assuming it offers a reasonable representation of what the shop offers, has no safety issue.
    - jlarocco 10d ago
      AI stealing their jobs isn't a "legitimate material harm"? It doesn't matter anyway, because "using AI" doesn't make somebody a protected class. If people don't want to patronize businesses that use AI, there's nothing wrong with that.
jackb4040 10d ago
To be fair to the news, there probably wasn't much else happening in Buffalo NY

mothzilla 10d ago

Exactly. Pure cancel culture. Just be humble to understand the world might not agree with your views and let it be. Less "this can't exist" and more of "this is not for me".

jlarocco 10d ago
Cancel culture or not, people are allowed to tell other people they know that something is happening, and those people can decide for themselves to patronize the business or not. To call it a threat is really exaggerating. The headline makes it sound like people are phoning in bomb threats and violence, which doesn't seem to be happening at all. Honestly, I think the business owner should have ignored these weak "threats" altogether. It doesn't have anything to do with coffee and it's unlikely they'll get any business because they use AI, so it can only hurt them.
- jackb4040 10d ago
  If the Montgomery Bus Boycott happened today most Americans would call it cancel culture.
- mothzilla 10d ago
  I get you think the word is too heavy but remember: it's a small business and bad press is a serious thing. It could be enough to shut down the place. Just see how afraid local shop owners are of Yelp. You get review bombed there and you have a serious problem. You don't know if these artists won't just unload their (just) frustration at AI on the business exactly like that. By judging the tone "change or I'll tell the artists", it's very likely the person would try to incite them instead of just "telling" them.
thrance 10d ago
It's not cancel culture to bad-mouth a business and refuse them your patronage. People are vocal about what they feel passionate about, and a world where they weren't or couldn't sounds hellish to me. How would society ever progress? We'd still have "whites only" restaurants in that world. Not saying that justifies all anger targeted at business owners, but a blanket "criticism bad" stance is a bit silly. You have to make an actual argument as to why you think the anti-AI crowd is misguided in this case.