Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

foxbusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 410 posts

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#271

Post by the_common_man »

skybrian wrote: post #80
throwawaymanbot wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree totally. I would find it hard to believe, that large well financed companies, with some of the most technically capable staff on the planet, would have the restraint to not peek.

It's not just a matter of restraint. Large, well-financed companies can also afford to put some of their most capable staff on internal security.

> It's not just a matter of restraint. Large, well-financed companies can also afford to put some of their most capable staff on internal security.

So how come the VW fiasco didn't get caught years ago?

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#272

Post by zaccus »

SilasX wrote: post #266
haltingthoughts wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The receiver of the surplus (Walmart vs consumers) is kinda important...

First of all, consumers get lower prices at Walmart, it doesn't just have the effect of higher profits. Second, the real danger in both cases (though people only see it in one, hence my point) is that you're killing off the OEMs this way. No one wants to bring innovative new products to market if some monopsonist will just force them down to the mandated n% profits.

Nope.

1) Walmart doesn't pass savings to consumers, it passes them to shareholders, as they have a fiduciary obligation to do. The "lower prices" thing is just marketing; WM's prices aren't particularly low once they've driven away their competition.

2) If drug companies want to charge a R&D premium for bleeding-edge innovative products, that's fine. What's not fine is price gouging consumers for drugs they depend on to live, that are not innovative in 2017, and that are cheaply available in other countries, like the EpiPen.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#273

Post by randcraw »

cookiecaper wrote: post #243
__d__ wrote: post #220

I sold to Walmart for 4 years. In the beginning we believed we were lucky to become vendors. Then we realized how much stress they created. Every single year they would short pay our invoices. We would have to submit a claim with Walmart accounting. This process was completely and utterly time consuming. But the worst of it, they wouldn't pay the invoices owed until a year later. It's hard to float a $100,000 short p…

I've never worked with Walmart directly, but to be fair, I experienced this kind of thing all the time as a contractor. It seems to be sort of an unspoken thing in accounting departments that you allow vendors to complain before you pay too much attention to the particularities of any given invoice. It doesn't excuse the practice and I always appreciated the clients who paid correctly and promptly, but I don't think…

I work in the IT division of a Fortune 100 pharma. About four years ago I was astonished as a senior business director proudly bragged to us about the company's successful accounts payable strategy of paying all vendor bills as late as possible. This allowed the company to earn a higher yield on overnight investments, despite the continuing outcry from business partners.

I imagine most giant corporations now behave this way, with only the little guys playing by the rules, and paying the price.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#274

Post by sqeaky »

deegles wrote: post #138
sharemywin wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is a collection of individuals. It only takes a small number of employees to circumvent the best protocols.

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous to say. If you had enough knowledge about AWS security practices to assert that, you'd know not to say it.

What about Amazon, a company, a collection of individuals, makes them better than other people?

Even groups with extremely stringent security protocols has trouble with people skirting security procedure. Consider the US Air Force who has control over a large collection of nuclear weapons. They have some of the most stringent procedures like Chain of Custody (any time a weapon changes hands a verified ledger is written to by the recipients and deliverers and sent elsewhere for archiving and oversight), Two person control (There are always two people with every weapon and every launch code container) and about a dozen other extreme procedures they still occasionally "lose" a nuclear fucking bomb.

The last time they lost one they accidentally left it loaded on an airplane on a low security runway. Any construction worker (which are always on every Military base) could have walked up to the plane and hauled off with it. Thankfully this didn't happen and hopefully runway security would have intervened, but this goes to show that as long as people are involved there can and will be mistakes.

To drive this point just a little harder, the Air Force has strong motive to not lose weapons and Amazon might have financial incentive to look on occasion.

I re-iterate, what about Amazon, a company, a collection of individuals, makes them better than other people?

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#275

Post by j2bax »

Kocrachon wrote: post #213
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I'm aware and they do https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/ - but the point remains that they're both: 1. Giving their largest competitor money 2. Relying on them not to peek at their data for competitive advantage. Which are the items that Walmart has objections with.

Is Amazon Video really a competitor? Their prime offering is shit. Hulu, to me, is a far more viable competitor. Amazon Video is only good for buying or renting. Their free offerings are terrible.

They've got plenty of great content. A good roster of original shows, lots of classic and new movies and on and on. The fact that you can rent/buy new releases before they are typically on Netflix or Hulu, is a major bonus of the service if you ask me.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#276

Post by SmirkingRevenge »

ancap wrote: post #151
empath75 wrote: post #144

If libertarians don't realize that the system they're advocating for is essentially corporate feudalism, they're suckers. I'd rather have a powerful government accountable to voters than a powerful corporate oligarchy that is only accountable to shareholders.

Except you're imagining power in entirely the wrong place. It is the consumers who hold all the power within a free economy. Corporations only become large and profitable in a free economy when they meet the ever increasing demands of the consumers. To quote Ludwig von Mises: The real bosses, in the capitalist system of market economy, are the consumers. They, by their buying and by their abstention from buying, deci…

Consumers, in aggregate, are stupid and irrational. Their wants and desires and opinions can be shaped by the entities with the most resources to peddle their influence, or the best, most believable lies.

Economics can't really fix such a core design flaw in human nature, it has to be the other way around, IMHO.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#277

Post by y4mi »

davidf18 wrote: post #253
throwaway2048 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They most certainly do and have. Take Books and Ebooks for a good example. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/02/17/cheap-words

I was referring to these smaller firms as was addressed in the comment. Regarding the major book selling firms, Amazon are the good guys because a relatively few book firms control the market. Amazon is helping to improve the customer experience by lowering the price of books.

> Amazon are the good guys because a relatively few book firms control the market. Amazon is helping to improve the customer experience by lowering the price of books.

they're replacing an oligopoly that is exploiting their customers with a monopoly though.

amazon hasn't really started exploiting its monopoly status yet (to my knowledge) toward the consumers, but a lot of authors have already started to complain about it.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#278

Post by randcraw »

JoblessWonder wrote: post #248
mongol wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question. How do companies in the US go about assessing the solvency and financial status of suppliers. In Sweden annual reports are public records for all limited companies, not only public companuee. How would US company determine that a supplier is solvent and not at risk of bankruptcy, which would be a risk to build into supply chains etc?

In the US, Dun & Bradstreet [1] is a company that attempts to provide a sort of "credit report" for both public and private companies of all sizes. Companies are required to have a DUNS number to do business with the government and it can act as a sort of unique ID. However, like other credit agencies, it isn't infallible and is only as good as the information it is able to gather through information sharing agreemen…

20 years ago my father ran a small business and routinely relied on D&B reports to provide insight into the creditworthiness of unknown suppliers or customers.

Of course investors and larger institutions use Standard & Poors and Moody's to provide credit ratings and background histories on public companies and their stocks and bonds.

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#279

Post by Oletros »

petraeus wrote: post #194
Oletros wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you think Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, etc spy the confidential data of their customers?

So .. you think they ... don't?

Until proven wrong, yes, I think they don't do that, there is no proof and it would be very silly to do that on EC2, Google Cloud or Azure.

Any hint that they could have been sneaking in confidential data of customers?

Re: Wal-Mart is telling some vendors they can’t run applications on AWS

#280

Post by KirinDave »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #269
empath75 wrote: post #144

If libertarians don't realize that the system they're advocating for is essentially corporate feudalism, they're suckers. I'd rather have a powerful government accountable to voters than a powerful corporate oligarchy that is only accountable to shareholders.

Libertarians, in the meantime, would contend that you're the sucker for believing that a powerful government will be held accountable to voters. Consider, for instance, the CIA and NSAs black ops, emergence of a 2 party system, voter turnout levels, gerrymandering, etc.

I think history suggests that governments are easier to reform than international financial interests.
Post reply on HN