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

Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 281 posts

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#151

Post by sangnoir »

sokoloff wrote: post #93
foobiekr wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you are contaminating the water. Don’t do this.

Every acre-foot of lake is over 325K gallons or well over a million liters. A typical destination lake will have over half-trillion (0.5 x 10¹²) gallons of water in it. Your and your 1000 friends' pint/500mL of urine isn't going to do anything meaningful to the lake.

I remember an open reservoir being emptied because surveillance video showing a person peeing in it got publicized; millions of gallons gone to waste because people are more disgusted by human urine than they are by decomposing possums.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#152

Post by eecks »

bredren wrote: post #20

We had a driver pour out a bottle of pee directly onto the street in front of our place from his open driver’s side van window on Saturday afternoon. My wife got a photo and then immediately after they delivered packages and left I went and took a photo because I couldn’t believe it. I had not heard about the controversy until then, but my wife had been following it. I read these tweets and I also didn’t believe they…

You couldn't have asked him in during covid and they couldn't have asked. Unless this was really close to your front door you should have let it go.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#153

Post by whimsicalism »

SR2Z wrote: post #88
ahelwer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps he had to urinate again, and did not have an additional bottle? What then should he have done? If you'll notice, we're now heading down the path of playing out ever-more-elaborate strategies for individual delivery drivers to maintain homeostasis without offending the delicate sensibilities of the people they serve, instead of questioning why this is a problem in the first place.

The solution to this problem is not "dump a bottle of piss out on someone's lawn," it's "expand labor laws to cover this very obvious human rights issue and then hammer Amazon with it until they shape up." Workers need bathrooms, and employers have to pay for them.

"And in the mean time, report all violators to Amazon" is the implicitly unsaid thing that people here are disagreeing with, not the obvious statement that labor laws should be expanded and enforced.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#154

Post by whimsicalism »

alistairSH wrote: post #91
ahelwer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps he had to urinate again, and did not have an additional bottle? What then should he have done? If you'll notice, we're now heading down the path of playing out ever-more-elaborate strategies for individual delivery drivers to maintain homeostasis without offending the delicate sensibilities of the people they serve, instead of questioning why this is a problem in the first place.

Oh, I agree. Everybody deserves regular breaks during the workday. People have to eat, drink, pee, etc. Lack of such breaks doesn't, IMO, excuse peeing in my yard.

So it's the yard now? Even if it was the yard, while that is definitely a dick move, getting a delivery worker fired over it is more of a dick move.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#155

Post by anticristi »

libria wrote: post #83
bredren wrote: post #20

We had a driver pour out a bottle of pee directly onto the street in front of our place from his open driver’s side van window on Saturday afternoon. My wife got a photo and then immediately after they delivered packages and left I went and took a photo because I couldn’t believe it. I had not heard about the controversy until then, but my wife had been following it. I read these tweets and I also didn’t believe they…

Off topic, but I'm curious. Say a human empties a pee bottle on a public sewer drain and a dog pees on that same drain. I don't see much difference except one of them urinated in public. Chemically they're the same, but I'm more repulsed by the human waste, why is that?

Interesting though experiment.

Similarly, why do humans sometimes need to pay for urinating (I'm looking at you German SaniUnfair), but animals don't?

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#156

Post by stickfigure »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #140
Aunche wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Had the driver asked to use your bathroom, he likely would have lost precious time and have been indirectly penalized for it. What's the alternative? No matter how reasonable the expectations are, there will always be drivers who would rather pee in a bottle and end their shift 10 minutes early than spend 10 minutes finding a bathroom.

Um... I do not agree that there will always be drivers who prefer to pee in a bottle. I do not believe that there are office/home workers who always prefer to pee in bottles. The alternative is access to bathrooms. There are a lot of solutions to this problem. The same type of solutions any company that employees drivers have had for years.

> I do not agree that there will always be drivers who prefer to pee in a bottle

Nonsense. I know people who would rather pee in a bottle than wait for the next gas station on the I5. I personally have pissed on the sides of roads in lots of places on long car trips.

Dumping urine in an urban environment is pretty rude. But if I could save myself 10 mins a day by pissing in a bottle rather than some creepy gas station bathroom, why not? It's just piss.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#157

Post by ectopod »

alistairSH wrote: post #91
ahelwer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps he had to urinate again, and did not have an additional bottle? What then should he have done? If you'll notice, we're now heading down the path of playing out ever-more-elaborate strategies for individual delivery drivers to maintain homeostasis without offending the delicate sensibilities of the people they serve, instead of questioning why this is a problem in the first place.

Oh, I agree. Everybody deserves regular breaks during the workday. People have to eat, drink, pee, etc. Lack of such breaks doesn't, IMO, excuse peeing in my yard.

It wasn't in anybody's yard, it was in the road. And they didn't pee there, they emptied a bottle.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#158

Post by colejohnson66 »

Rule35 wrote: post #126
chewmieser wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't new - Amazon workers have had to pee in bottles for years. From 2018: https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-warehouse-workers-hav... This is just the same old Amazon - they optimize everything to the point that humans can't keep pace with their metrics without cutting corners.

> have had to pee in bottles for years Contractors can choose to pee where they want. But employees can sue so easily over this sort of thing. It's a specific OSHA violation. This story depends on confusing the issue about who is and isn't a contractor, doing this to themselves. The contractor should be let go. As the response notes, they represent the company and represent it badly.

If they’re driving an Amazon branded truck, they’re Amazon for all I care. When an ISP contractor shows up at your house and is rude, you don’t go “well, they’re a contractor, so I can’t blame Spectrum for this.” No, they have Spectrum’s branding on, so they represent Spectrum. It doesn’t matter if they’re a contractor or not.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#159

Post by dboreham »

andonisus wrote: post #75

I am of the opinion that all truckers (or people in the delivery profession) pee in bottles to save time, not just Amazon drivers. Why is Amazon being singled out here? I suppose the argument is that it is caused by their aggressive delivery metrics and policies, but would t this be true of any shipping company? If drivers are incentivized to by the number of packages they deliver to meet bonuses or certain payouts,…

Indeed. I live close to an interstate in a rural area and the neighbors to a trash pickup every year. We're actually picking up trash on the "frontage road" rather than the interstate, but the two are only 100' apart. I can tell you that truck drivers peeing in bottles then throwing said bottles out the window is very common.
Post reply on HN