!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
Text messages cost $0.10 each where I live. And it used to cost up to $0.35 each 20 years ago.
The delivery report would count as a message, thus, doubling your bill.
It was used exclusively to deliver news like death or wedding invitations. For other matters which usually need going back and forth, it was cheaper to just make a call.
Nowadays, we just use WhatsApp.
the markup on text messaging has always been northern of 99.999%. it costs them almost nothing.
Originally they were planned to be free. Until the providers realized how popular they are.
Even crazier is they take up almost no bandwidth because they were sent in the unused part of the control packet which was being sent anyway.
This is true. When I checked on this about five years ago (in the UK), the cost per message was about £0.00001
With the reduction in the number of SMS sent, it now costs more to bill them. In the UK, even the cheapest monthly contract has unlimited calls and texts. There a pre-pay tariffs as low as £3 a month with calls, texts and some data.
Sure, the marginal cost is basically nothing. Once you have invested billions in infrastructure.
Not saying 10 cents isn't outrageous, just that 0.001 cents seems low
Damn wtf. People still pay per text? Wack
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
Damn that math checks out!! 16.50 for 20gb of data is wayy more worth it than unlimited text
Even though many phone plans today have unlimited texts, some still don't. A delivery report is basically a second SMS, that you then have to pay for, so I think that is why it is an opt-in feature.
Yeah, but it's an incoming SMS? Are there still any tariffs with paid incoming messages (possibly except when roaming)?
clarification: it is sent by the network, not by the recipient's handset, so they pay nothing for it
Back in the day, I paid for every single received text, network provided or not. If some asshat decided to mass text me, it could easily run my phone bill up real fast.
As well as the charges issue there are three other points.
They are delivery reports not read reports.
Because of the way they are implemented they are low priority on the network and will be dropped at busy times. (This means the lack of a delivery report doesn’t necessarily mean it wasn’t delivered)
They don’t work reliably across different message centres. If you and the recipient are on different message centres, You’ll get a delivery report when it reaches the next message centre. (This means that a delivery report doesn’t necessarily mean the message was delivered)
No one seems to be discussing that when a spammer learns that your number is in active use, they add it to a list and sell it to other spammers, so you get a lot more spam (particularly robo-dialing).
This is a worse problem in countries with weak anti-spam enforcement for phones (cough - USA - cough).
I'm not aware whether spammers and scammers are using these message receipts to scan across random numbers ro build their robo-dial lists, but I would be surprised if they are not doing so.
If they are not already doing it, I guarantee they're working on getting it to work for them in an affordable and convenient-to-them way.
For that reason, I keep message receipts off on my devices.
Edit: If it's really only for your incoming messages, none of the above applies. I'm not going to go look that up for a rude Internet stranger. That said, I would be wary, I've only seen this as an "opt-in" setting where if you're getting receipts, you're also sending them.
Message receipts are issued by the network, turning them off only applies to messages sent by you.
privacy, maybe? I know I don't want certain people notified that I have received their text
Nope, read the last sentence.
Which is wrong. You can disable it on either end. If I disable it, I won't send out "I've seen this" messages. It is about privacy. I have mine turned off so annoying bosses can't be like "but you saw my message!" even if I was busy and couldn't do anything about it.
Isn't that for MMS only?
You might be correct there. I seem to remember it being part of the MMS settings, BUT I know I can also force sms vs MMS for a conversation. I can also require both of us are encrypting(I think, been a bit since I checked).
Pixel 6 Pro, fyi. So "stock" android.
I don't think this setting does what you think it does.
I get a check mark next to a sent text, and a double check for a delivered text, but I never turned on Get SMS delivery reports. So, this option must not control that feature. From what I can tell, with a quick Google search, it's a more detailed report that includes which towers and switches the message went through and is more intended for marketers to make sure that their spam is reaching their audience.
You get the second check mark because Google Messenger sends RCS by default instead of SMS if the receiver is compatible.
Could it be that it's just not reliable on all networks in all countries?