Bye, Amazon • Hacker News Board

Re: Bye, Amazon

#881

Post by uoaei » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:49 PM UTC

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #871

specialp wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes for me too. The fact that Amazon is so cheap that they want employees to sit around for 20-30 minutes after their shift unpaid to get searched to make sure they aren't stealing blew me away. It is one thing if Amazon wants to do this and pay their employees, but to not pay is wrong. And they felt so strongly about this they appealed a case all the way to the Supreme Court... That was the snapping point for me too…

> The fact that Amazon is so cheap you mean the company that pays high wages?

You have a very myopic view of what Amazon is and what roles the majority of its labor force occupy.

The bulk of Amazon's workforce are delivery drivers, warehouse workers, and datacenter rats. They are not paid fairly. It's pretty obvious from the numbers. For more supporting evidence, read TFA.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#882

Post by BrandonM » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:49 PM UTC

ssklash wrote: post #783

BrandonM wrote: post #767

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's taking things a bit too far. Of course, the ultimate goal of every for-profit corporation is to make a profit. But along the way, most of them are providing value to society. So much of the Internet as we know it is built atop AWS. Many people are able to shelter in place with minimal impact largely because of the groundwork laid by Amazon, during more than a decade of not being profitable. That includ…

I agree that we should demand that companies should respect privacy. And if they did, Facebook and Google would cease to exist, or have never existed in the first place. They are surveillance capitalism, pure and simple. They may make Gmail free and make it seem like a photo sharing service exists to help grandparents connect with their kids, but those are simply hooks to lure people in for their data. They have all…

I don't think anyone is claiming that these companies are acting out of the goodness of their hearts. These companies all have missions, though. Companies are made up of people. Some of those people believe in those missions and choose to work for those companies for those reasons. A larger group of people are happy to exchange time for money, provided that their company does not stray too far from its mission.

It's not a black-and-white choice between "goodness of their hearts" or ruthlessly exploitative capitalism. There's a huge gray area in between, and that's where social and legal guardrails (for better or for worse) have to help ensure that companies act in a socially responsible way.

I don't have experience with Facebook specifically, but I have worked with Google's security team. From what I've seen, Google truly cares about securing their users' data in a way that exceeds the standards of other large enterprises that I've worked with. I get a ton of spam emails and phone calls every day, and never once have I suspected that it was because Google or Facebook violated my privacy.

I'd rather focus my ire on companies like Equifax or popular browser plugin acquirers or the debt collection system or even mall sweepstakes. All of these entities egregiously violate privacy by blatantly sharing user information, auctioning it off to the highest bidder, or recklessly failing to secure it.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#883

Post by bawana » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:50 PM UTC

Is amazon evil because it's big or because they compete with more evil abroad?

Re: Bye, Amazon

#884

Post by ncallaway » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:52 PM UTC

smoe wrote: post #863

xenocyon wrote: post #688

My personal snapping point as a consumer occurred several years ago, over something that's definitely not anecdotal: When Amazon employees are frisked at the end of their shift (which is a practice that applies to at least some warehouses), they are not paid for the time they spend waiting in line to be frisked. This is not an anecdote; indeed Amazon fought and won a court case insisting that it has the right to not…

I always think it is a bit odd when a company wins a case like this, but then people blame the company, not the court or the law. Not saying, that you don't disagree with the courts decisions, but I keep getting this feeling especially from the US. Why do people realistically expect a company to not stretch things as far as legally possible? I get why libertarians would see it this way, but everyone else?

> Why do people realistically expect a company to not stretch things as far as legally possible?

What I expect people to do, what the standards I hold people to are often different.

I expect Amazon to push things as far as they are able. I strongly dislike them because of it. My standards of acceptable conduct are above "barely legal" conduct. My expectations are below legal conduct.

I also can blame two entities for this outcome. The law and the courts are awful for allowing this to stand as the settled law on the matter. I blame them for the situation. Amazon is also awful for pushing the law to this point and taking advantage of it. I blame them for the situation, too.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#885

Post by saagarjha » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:52 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #874

tempestn wrote: post #862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How feasible would it be to actually enforce that in the code? Would be great if edits were append-only after some period of time. So you could correct a typo immediately after posting still, but after a few minutes you'd just be able to append. (Replying to your own comment doesn't serve the same function, since it could be lost under other replies.)

It would probably be better to just disallow editing to any comment with replies.

Or have an auditable edit history.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#886

Post by uoaei » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:54 PM UTC

freshhawk wrote: post #860

jillesvangurp wrote: post #122

It's a wake up call, or at least an attempt at that, for the likes of Amazon that if they are looking to have reputable people, like Tim Bray, associate themselves and their name with you, there are certain standards that have to be met. Amazon, MS, Google, Apple, etc. rank among the most wealthy companies in the world and they've each had to deal with internal pressures where their employees voiced concerns about ce…

Is it a wake up call? You can clearly see from the comments that many people here are still very much on the "but they're employees ... why would they have any rights? if they complain just crush them into paste to oil the machines" camp. The occasional high profile person quitting one of the big tech companies because of their constant illegal employee/whistleblower abuse happens regularly at this point. Is Tim Bray…

I think the next big revolution in political thinking will be the debate over the question of whether money is amoral. If I spend a dollar by giving it to someone, what does that enable them to do? What behaviors does that encourage and reinforce?

I think a lot of people would say that at some level money is moral (don't pay terrorist organizations or render services for them) but that distinction blurs as we get closer to mundane, real-life concerns like spending money at Amazon, Wal-Mart, or Whole Foods. I think it gets blurry because of desensitization and the need for folks to feel like they're not screwing over others during the normal course of their life. But the fact is that capital enables behaviors in a capitalist economic system, so allocating the capital you have control over is necessarily a moral act.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#887

Post by fataliss » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:56 PM UTC

I wish there was of some sort of association or union for people in the Software industry. While we are typically much better treated than basically every single other type of worker out there, we lack the assurance of protection when it comes to challenging our employers. In a country where your healthcare, your retirement and possibly your immigration status are tied to your employment, how can one feel confident that sticking to their convictions like you did will not cost them and their family a cost so great that they cannot bear it. I would like for Software and more generally tech workers of all trade to be able to say NO or ENOUGH, when working for a company that steals tips, coerces workers into unfavorable situation or plainly disrespects human rights. I dream of a world where workers can rely on something having their back when making the right decision.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#888

Post by uoaei » Mon, May 04, 2020, 9:59 PM UTC

quotemstr wrote: post #876

jillesvangurp wrote: post #122

It's a wake up call, or at least an attempt at that, for the likes of Amazon that if they are looking to have reputable people, like Tim Bray, associate themselves and their name with you, there are certain standards that have to be met. Amazon, MS, Google, Apple, etc. rank among the most wealthy companies in the world and they've each had to deal with internal pressures where their employees voiced concerns about ce…

I don't think Amazon is going to have any trouble at all filling open headcount with talented people on account of maintaining a politics-free workplace. It's become fashionable in tech among a certain crowd to bombard coworkers with divisive messaging about controversial social issues, to leak confidential information to sympathetic external press, and to demonize anyone who objects. This practice must end, and I ad…

It sounds like you think that the concern about Amazon is primarily about working conditions in the cushy office jobs. But that's not what anyone is talking about here. They're talking about frontline "essential" workers like those in the warehouses and delivery trucks.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#889

Post by [deleted] » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:01 PM UTC

softwaredoug wrote: post #779

taurath wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course as he is pointing out, he's in a position where he can afford to do so financially I'd just want to point out that the workers who are in the middle are the ones who can afford to do so financially and have the power to make management change things. If you're a programmer and make decent money, consider not putting yourself in a position where you must compromise your morals, such as accepting the compan…

Also why a FAANG anticompetitive stranglehold on tech is so horrifying. If you speak out against Amazon, will another tech giant hire you? Probably not...

[deleted]

Re: Bye, Amazon

#890

Post by uoaei » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:02 PM UTC

ganoushoreilly wrote: post #788

xenocyon wrote: post #688

My personal snapping point as a consumer occurred several years ago, over something that's definitely not anecdotal: When Amazon employees are frisked at the end of their shift (which is a practice that applies to at least some warehouses), they are not paid for the time they spend waiting in line to be frisked. This is not an anecdote; indeed Amazon fought and won a court case insisting that it has the right to not…

To be fair, almost every single major retail establishment has this same policy. Many of which have also been fined. This is no where near unique to Amazon.

"It's legal, so what is everyone complaining about?"

Law != ethics