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.

▲

mothzilla an hour ago | parent | next [-]

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 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		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.

▲

jlarocco an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

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.

▲

brandon272 31 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

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 19 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		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?

▲

fakedang an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

"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 38 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		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.