Live data from Hacker News

Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

kgw.com

171–180 of 255 posts

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#171
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really worth your eyes and the extra money to take a risk on the glasses that you're still not giving up on them and planning on researching them? Why not just buy one that you know is reputable?

At this stage of game they will be hard to get, many of the "legit" suppliers have 100+ minimum orders right now. The Eclipse is 1 week away after all

As far as I can tell, they're basically not available at this point, even in areas far from the path of totality.

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#172
post #136
post #30

I ordered the top-rated eclipse glasses on Amazon a few months ago and they were counterfeit. If you put them on during daytime you can see indirect sunlight and even my kitchen light. They were shipped from China despite having "Made in the USA" markings and all the proper ISO certification fine print. I haven't received any communication from Amazon, so people who haven't heard from them should not assume their gla…

As a comparison to the counterfeits, I took some pictures of my 'real' Soluna glasses, which I ordered a couple weeks ago from Amazon (and didn't get an email.) Also they pass the manufacturer's tests for verifying real glasses. 100 W equivalent CFL is very dimly visible. http://imgur.com/a/5hMfu

I've been testing mine with a red laser pointer (NOT into my eye!). The glasses reflect a lot, even at a high angle. What does get through does not project beyond the filter itself, and is very dim, even in a darkened room (yes, I'm being careful, I know a reflection can cause damage). When I look at a 100W equiv CFL bulb, it resembles what you photographed. I've also looked briefly at my smartphone flash when in flashlight mode, it is quite dim and 'shifted' toward yellow. Just wondering if I can extrapolate these into a transmission spectrum.

I'm leaning toward throwing on an ordinary UV blocking pair of sunglasses on top and then limiting my time anyway, you can basically see the same thing with the pinhole technique. This is a risk I would take for myself, if my children were still young I would not risk their eyes, nor do it in front of them and tell them they couldn't.

Also, I can distinctly remember staring directly at the sun as a (dumbass) kid on multiple occasions for as long as I could stand it.

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#174
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, doesn't really matter what seller you buy from. Amazon says "The supplies all said these are the same item, so they're interchangeable" and they treat all the inventory the same regardless of who it came from. Maybe legit sellers that aren't "fulfilled by Amazon" are safer because they ship it themselves?

That's only for sellers that opt in to commingling. Plenty of sellers don't.

This is incorrect, kind of. There are essentially 3 ways to sell on Amazon. 1. Amazon can buy your product wholesale and they sell it. The manufacturer still has a lot of control on pricing and listing and etc. But Amazon has more control. In this case Amazon uses the UPC (or equivalent) to come up with the ASIN. In this case any 3rd party seller can list the same item with the UPC and it will show up on the same listing. They can even sell it via FBA where it is labeled as prime and stocked in Amazon's warehouses and if priced cheaper then will often get the buy box. So you could have 1000 positive reviews for your product and then all of a sudden a counterfeiter ships Amazon a bunch of what they say is the exact same product with the same UPC and it gets listed on the same listing. They can even make these stand out more by making variations on the product that then show up (like a 2-pack) that maybe you never sold.

Secondly there is Fulfilled By Amazon (FBA) this is when you sell the products and Amazon takes a commission and all the fulfillment fees to store and ship the product for you. In this case the seller has MUCH MUCH more control over every aspect of the listing. They can choose to have the ASIN generated by the UPC which can result in the same problem as above OR they can choose to have the ASIN generated by a number and barcode that is unique to the particular seller. This is called a FNSKU. Even if you know the FNSKU number which would be on a barcode on the product, ONLY the particular seller can create /ship product to Amazon using it. So Only the seller can variate listing or sell the product.

And thirdly you can do seller fulfillment which works list the last option in terms of listing, just with your own warehousing and fulfillment.

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#175
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a comparison to the counterfeits, I took some pictures of my 'real' Soluna glasses, which I ordered a couple weeks ago from Amazon (and didn't get an email.) Also they pass the manufacturer's tests for verifying real glasses. 100 W equivalent CFL is very dimly visible. http://imgur.com/a/5hMfu

I've been testing mine with a red laser pointer (NOT into my eye!). The glasses reflect a lot, even at a high angle. What does get through does not project beyond the filter itself, and is very dim, even in a darkened room (yes, I'm being careful, I know a reflection can cause damage). When I look at a 100W equiv CFL bulb, it resembles what you photographed. I've also looked briefly at my smartphone flash when in fla…

"Also, I can distinctly remember staring directly at the sun as a (dumbass) kid on multiple occasions for as long as I could stand it."

Yes, nature has made it so that we can't do that and harm ourselves, since the sun has been there for a long time. The problem is precisely that during the eclipse you'll be able to "stand it" for much, much longer. Eclipses don't happen often enough for us to be protected against them, and I also have to imagine most animals aren't as fascinated with them as we are...

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#176
Poorly handled by Amazon because the _absence_ of an email (there is no other way to tell, for example from the order page on the amazon web site) signifies that the glasses are safe. So if the email get spam filtered or otherwise doesn't reach the appropriate person, they have no idea that the product isn't safe. The order page should say "not safe" or "safe" so people can check themselves.

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#177
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Amazon seller I used is listed If it was "fulfilled by Amazon", it doesn't matter what seller you chose, you could have been sent a counterfeit item from another seller. Sellers using fulfillment-by-Amazon send their stock to Amazon's warehouse, where it gets thrown in the same bin as all the other stock of that item from everyone else selling it. When it gets pulled to ship to you, there's no guarantee you get…

Seriously? I am very surprised. Surely Amazon cannot ignore this counterfeit product problem. Doing this looks like opening an avenue for litigation.

They've been ignoring it for years.

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#178

Is there anything particularly dangerous about viewing the sun directly? When I was dumb and young I'd look at the sun for seconds at a time without any problems developing so far. Is the danger that an eclipse encourages you to stare at the sun without encountering any pain?

My understanding is that the human eye has pain receptors that respond to wavelengths in the visible spectrum. As the moon occludes the sun, the level of visible light drops below the level where prolonged viewing causes pain.

But visible light is not the only frequency. Sunlight also contains UV and IR wavelengths. The human eye does not have pain receptors that respond to these frequencies.

The end result is that during an eclipse it becomes more likely that a person will fries their eyes due to the presence of UV and IR wavelengths.

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#179
post #78

What kind of piece of shit makes these things? It's one thing to make a crappy knockoff phone charger. It may be less efficient and even less safe, but you can probably rationalize it away since they mostly work OK. But this is a piece of safety equipment with a single function, and people only buy it to use it in one way, which will cause direct and immediate harm if the product fails. How can someone live with them…

"Après moi le déluge! is the watchword of every capitalist and of every capitalist nation. Hence Capital is reckless of the health or length of life of the labourer, unless under compulsion from society." --Karl Marx s/labourer/consumer/

You know, it does seem like some people need to be reminded that China is nominally Communist.

("It's not real Communism." But it's a real outcome of the attempt to create Communism, so it counts just fine.)

The thing is, if you want safety, what you want is a separation between the manufacturer and the regulator. In Communism, the manufacturer and the regulator are de facto the same entity. Communism lacks any entity that is capable of coming out and saying independently that there's a problem. If you've ever complained about "regulatory capture", you've just explained why Communism is non-functional; Communism institutionalizes 100% total regulatory capture from day one and holds it up as an ideal.

Re: Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

#180
Reading the comments here, I wonder if folks have read the article? The problem seems to be not that Amazon has recalled counterfeit items but rather they have recalled legitimate product, blaming the legitimate seller for the fact that Amazon can't keep straight where their safety-critical inventory came from. It is as if they have a bin for "Viagra" in the warehouse into which they put shipments from Pfizer, along with whatever comes in from their eBay-grade sellers. Then they blame Pfizer for the eBay drugs not being properly traceable and tested.

Source: I received the emails, read the article, and at least one of the products I received is certainly not counterfeit.

Post reply on HN