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

Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 526 posts

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#501

Post by foldr »

Vraxx wrote: post #455
foldr wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When companies like Amazon do things that are morally wrong, you never see people making this claim that moral concepts don't apply to companies. They only say it when it's convenient for them (i.e., when they want to take advantage of Amazon rather than vice versa). To compare a company's actions to those of a mosquito strikes me as quite silly. Amazon is run by people who make conscious choices and who are responsi…

Also, that comparison is made specifically because companies have no morality and so if we want them to behave in any sort of way approximating our morals, they must be regulated to do so. Those comments are advocating a change in the way companies are treated in order to get them to behave in a more expected manner.

I don't follow. People also need to be regulated in order to behave morally. Companies are run by people and it's entirely possible for companies to take moral stands or deliberately decide to do the right thing even when it's not the most profitable thing. It might not happen as often as we'd like, but it certainly does happen.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#502

Post by foldr »

darkarmani wrote: post #463
foldr wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument cuts both ways. If Amazon isn't a moral entity, then there's also no moral violation if they screw you over.

> This argument cuts both ways. If Amazon isn't a moral entity, then there's also no moral violation if they screw you over. In that case, it's not a moral violation if they screw you over, but it's not a moral violation if you end them for screwing you over either. The mosquito isn't violating morals when it bites me, but I'd still have no problem eliminating them all from my backyard if i could do it in a reasonabl…

Sure, maybe it's all about power and there's no real difference between right and wrong.

I just don't see why that kind of nihilism suddenly becomes more plausible than usual when you're buying something from Amazon.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#503

Post by foldr »

merpnderp wrote: post #440
rapind wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shit begets shit. If you're buying from a local mom and pop where the owners are part of your community it's far less likely you would take advantage of the situation. People still return wallets full of money. How are they morally bankrupt? Amazon is an example of unfettered capitalism, and are seen differently in the eyes of the consumer. Right or wrong, people just don't care about a megacorps well being (and I do…

What is unfettered capitalism? The "unfettered" part leads me to believe this is a pejorative. Wikipedia redirects to economic liberalism, which is just free markets in opposition to planned economies. Is there anyone even remotely serious who thinks planned economies are superior? Is there a planned economy in the world that isn't in tattered ruins, impoverishing its people in the most hideous and evil fashion, whil…

China's economy is planned to a significant extent and doesn't match that description. Of course, it is not a textbook example of a planned economy, but neither is the economy of any Western country a textbook example of a laissez-faire free market economy. The US economy, for example, is significantly distorted by an enormous amount of planned 'defense' spending. Real economies tend to be complex and have a mix of features.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#504

Post by gamblor956 »

shawnz wrote: post #491
gamblor956 wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's exactly wrong. They don't have a duty to minimize waste, otherwise they would have a duty to not award golden parachutes or large executive compensation packages or even to pay themselves more than a few hundred bucks a year.

> otherwise they would have a duty to not award golden parachutes or large executive compensation packages That's actually true though, they do have such a duty. http://www.shareholderoppression.com/excessive-compensation

That only applies to approving their own excessive compensation..

It helps to read things before you link to then....

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#505

Post by brokenmachine »

bko wrote: post #331
thrax wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Repeat after me: Amazon is not a person. Why aren't you arguing against the daily electrocution of toasters?

Amazon is a corporation, essentially a legal structure meant to encompass a group of investors. Investors range from its founder Jeff Bezos to small investors holding Amazon shares in pension funds and 401ks. You too can buy one share of Amazon for ~$2000 or invest in a low cost ETF that would own Amazon. The value of the stock is driven partly by expectation of future earnings. If Amazon were to lose future earnings…

If Amazon stock goes to $0, all that says is that literally nobody wants to buy Amazon stock.

You still own your shares. You were not robbed, your gamble did not pay off.

Also, for this to happen, Amazon would have to be very very very bad at doing its job, which is to sell products for a profit. A company that is that bad at doing its one job has no god-given right to remain liquid.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#506

Post by sagebird »

lysp wrote: post #179
docker_up wrote: post #164

This is an unintentional by-product of shipping so quickly. As Amazon moves to quicker and quicker shipping policies, it means that errors like this can't be reversed in time. I would imagine that Amazon could threaten to close the customer's account if they refused to return the camera equipment but that might be a bit extreme and might be very bad press.

You'd think they'd add a fail-safe into their systems just in case for these circumstances. eg. * If SalePrice * If (CostPrice - SalesPrice) > $500 - Delay Order

Obligatory Boeing edition:

* If trim adjust > 2.5deg { deactivate mcas }

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#507

Post by readhn »

moate wrote: post #435
readhn wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Companies are not human beings" I beg to differ... Corporate personhood is the legal notion that a corporation, separately from its associated human beings (like owners, managers, or employees), has at least some of the legal rights and responsibilities enjoyed by natural persons (physical humans).

"Human beings" =/="personhood".

Corporations are people.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#508

Post by brokenmachine »

dtech wrote: post #384
donkeyd wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Netherlands, two similar cases went to court and judges have ruled that the selling party does not have to deliver in such a case. Dutch sources here: https://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie-en-contact/Organisati... https://www.techzine.nl/nieuws/42639/otto-hoeft-goedkope-lcd...

This is also formalized in Dutch law. A consumer is entitled to the list price, unless there has been a "obvious" mistake. The classical example is an item being listed for €5,99 instead of €599,-

I know we're talking about what the actual law is, but interestingly in that classical example you state, making a product cost 599 is clearly to take advantage of the average person's cognitive weaknesses in thinking of 599 as significantly less than 600.

If they made the prices a round number like 600 as a rule then it would be much more obvious, and probably they would be less likely to make the mistake of making it 100x less than they intended. Bad luck for them.

I wonder how much less they would have made over a year if they made all products that were x.99 be x+1. I'm sure that effect has been measured by these companies at some stage, and that's why they continue to do it.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for any company that makes such a mistake, as the consumers aren't repaid the difference due to their price fiddling, and I'm willing to bet the instances in which a company makes a mistake add up to less than the extra money spent by consumers having their innate biases exploited into paying all those extra cents all day every day.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#509

Post by brokenmachine »

mikeash wrote: post #392
sagebird wrote: post #239

It’s kind of interesting- the asymmetry of moral expectations and entitlement. If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it. On the other hand, if the matter is reversed, Amazon is expected to be a good sport and take the loss — even if the purchase was made in bad faith (ie- knowing Amazon mis-priced it but purchasing it anyways.) I’m not going to en…

I’m pretty sure everyone expects them to cancel these orders. The reason this is getting so much attention is because they actually honored the price, at least for some customers. Nobody forced them to do that.

And in so doing earned many times that value in free advertising and feel good stories about how great they are.

Coincidence?

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#510

Post by qntty »

WalterBright wrote: post #496
qntty wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally think that this is moral. I think that capitalism is inherently immoral so it's not immoral to "steal" from giant corporations. I consider myself a very moral person (you have to take morality very seriously if you disagree with the people around you about moral issues) but this doesn't bother me.

Do you mind when people steal from you?

Yes, and I think it's wrong to steal from people
Post reply on HN