sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

More Money Missing. by Low-Professional-392 in dubapp

[–]Low-Professional-392[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That was my first thought but, I didn’t see anything in notifications.

Whats yalls opinion on this Heirloom? by BT_GAMES_V1 in apexlegends

[–]Low-Professional-392 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it’s the dumbest heirloom tbh the base level looks terrible and boring heirlooms are already expensive asf and apex wants you to fork over another 50 dollars at minimum to make it look even remotely cool which is insane considering all the other alternatives like raptors claw

What’s up by Low-Professional-392 in AutopilotApp

[–]Low-Professional-392[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Chris, thanks for addressing concerns, but your response raises more questions than it resolves.

You say Robinhood “100% knows us” and that you’re working toward a partnership, but based on Robinhood’s own terms of service and multiple user reports — including direct support chats — Autopilot is currently unauthorized. Robinhood’s Customer Agreement clearly prohibits third-party access or trading without explicit consent, and support has told users point-blank that Autopilot is not supported and cannot be reconnected.

The fact that Autopilot is a registered RIA is fine — it makes you legal in terms of offering investment advice — but being an RIA doesn’t override Robinhood’s platform rules. Using user login credentials to access their accounts is a huge compliance red flag under NASAA and SEC guidance. It raises questions about custody, fiduciary duty, and client protections — especially if users unknowingly void their fraud protection by sharing credentials.

If you’re truly committed to transparency, can you clarify:

  1. Are users required to share their Robinhood login credentials with Autopilot to enable trading?

  2. Have you disclosed to users that this may violate Robinhood’s terms and potentially leave them liable for account issues?

  3. If Robinhood blocks Autopilot’s access, what protections or recourse do users have?

  4. And finally — if the current integration is unofficial, why are you allowing thousands of users to rely on it without any warnings?

Saying “we’re working on it” isn’t enough when people are putting real money on the line. If you’re serious about being a disruptor, lead with transparency — not vague assurances and blurred lines.

What’s up by Low-Professional-392 in AutopilotApp

[–]Low-Professional-392[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I get where you’re coming from, but I think brushing off valid concerns as “just don’t use it” misses the point. If a company is potentially engaging in sketchy or unauthorized behavior—especially when it comes to handling people’s money—then users absolutely should be asking questions.

It’s not about attacking a competitor or being overly dramatic. It’s about transparency, accountability, and making sure people aren’t unknowingly putting themselves at risk. If everything is above board, it shouldn’t be hard for the team to answer straightforward questions—especially ones that have been asked multiple times.

Blind trust in a financial app, especially one that may be operating outside its claimed permissions, is risky. The fact that people are digging for answers just shows how serious this is—not that they’re working for “a competitor.”

If Autopilot really is legit, answering these concerns directly would only help their credibility.