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

191–200 of 281 posts

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

#191

Post by tclancy »

Aunche wrote: post #130
sangnoir wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another option was sending it to media, which I presumed would have gotten attention. I thought the person had a better chance of holding on to the job if it was handled without publicity. Your faith in Amazon to do right is impressive - perhaps even naive. Amazon official policy is not for drivers to pee in bottles, however, it strongly incentivizes this behavior. Had the driver asked to use your bathroom, he like…

> 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.

A non-hellish non-dystopia where it would be presumed people need to urinate somewhere within their fixed 8 hour shift and maybe even more than once if they chose to work overtime?

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

#192

Post by tclancy »

alistairSH wrote: post #73
ahelwer wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You... ratted out the guy who delivers your packages to his corporate masters for doing the very human homeostatic requirement of urination? Seriously?

Peeing in a bottle wasn't the thing that was reported. Emptying a bottle of urine in front of the customer's home was the problem. The driver should have emptied the bottle into a toilet on his next break (or after his shift). Or, failing that, dump it in the woods out of the way.

>The driver should have emptied the bottle into a toilet on his next break

I mean, if that were even a remote possibility he wouldn't have filled a bottle, would he now?

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

#193

Post by tclancy »

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,…

I am so confused by the set of responses based on the idea "Well, lots of other people have awful working conditions, why are we picking on this particular billion dollar corporation?"

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

#194

Post by rideontime »

Rule35 wrote: post #104
bredren wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another option was sending it to media, which I presumed would have gotten attention. I thought the person had a better chance of holding on to the job if it was handled without publicity. I don't have a lab, so I can't determine if it was pee. And I can't imagine you'd get to hold on to a job at Target if you poured pee out in the parking lot in front of customers. Our friend with the USPS said "[at USPS] we’re allo…

Amazon's drivers are contractors if anyone is pushing them to pee in bottles, it's themselves. So there's no actual answer to this issue. Are they not being paid enough, such that they can't pee, or are they making an reasonable decision to pee in a bottle in order to save 15 minutes and make more money. Considering they keep taking the contracts one has to assume that they're profitable, at least usually. > I can't…

If you're wondering why this is getting buried, educate yourself on how Amazon "contracting" works. It's just a scheme to cut costs and shift all responsibility elsewhere.

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

#195

Post by unethical_ban »

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,…

The nature of the job, its geography/logistics and Amazon's PR campaign as this wonderful, progressive employer.

Someone said "it's what the middle class interacts with" but it's also about Amazon's aggressive blocking of reform or real worker rights.

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

#196

Post by calcifer »

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,…

> I am of the opinion that all truckers (or people in the delivery profession) pee in bottles to save time, not just Amazon drivers.

What is your opinion based on? A hunch? Random number generator? Your star sign? Maybe your horoscope?

> Why is Amazon being singled out here?

That's a strawman, nobody is singling out this company. Everyone is talking about Amazon because they publicly denied this ever happens from an official account.

> How would you even change the compensation or penalty structure to account for this?

Oh I don't know, maybe... and I realize this idea is so far out there so please bear with me for a second, maybe institute mandatory 15 minute breaks every 2-3 hours into the delivery schedule? Crazy, I know.

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

#197

Post by ALittleLight »

bredren wrote: post #70
notJim wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit surprised you sent the photos to Amazon. That person is likely to be fired. A bit of pee on the street is not going to harm anything or anyone (otherwise the streets around bars would be an enormous biohazard), although it's obviously gross.

Another option was sending it to media, which I presumed would have gotten attention. I thought the person had a better chance of holding on to the job if it was handled without publicity. I don't have a lab, so I can't determine if it was pee. And I can't imagine you'd get to hold on to a job at Target if you poured pee out in the parking lot in front of customers. Our friend with the USPS said "[at USPS] we’re allo…

Another option would've been not to do anything. If a dog peed on the street would you be upset about it and report it? How about if a bird defecated on the street? Why is human urine so much worse?

It strikes me as cruel to report and make trouble for a man who is already so overworked as to need to pee in a bottle.

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

#198

Post by whoknew1122 »

throwawaysea wrote: post #180
whoknew1122 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At Amazon you're encouraged (and expected) to escalate early and escalate often. Amazon security did its job very well. >"The real security incident here is how did the intercept learn of that ticket as that should really be classified." Looks like someone from the security or PR departments took a picture of the ticket with their cellphone and sent them to the reporter. Security tickets are immediately encrypted and…

Someone else in this discussion says this ticket was not locked down ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26626369 ). How do you know that someone from the security or PR department took a picture? It seems much more likely this is typical left leaning employee activism that is prevalent at tech companies.

1.) I never bothered to look up the ticket on the Amazon internal ticketing system. Given what the reporter alleged (i.e. that it was handled by someone from Amazon Security), I presumed it would take the standard security-related ticket handling procedures.

I obviously wouldn't look in internal ticketing systems and THEN post to my findings to a public forum like HN. For obvious reasons.

2.) > "It seems much more likely this is typical left leaning employee activism that is prevalent at tech companies."

If standard security ticket procedures were followed, it would have been locked down to the security team and the impacted team (i.e. PR/social media).

The comment that it 'seems much more likely that this is typical left leaning employee activism' implies that there aren't left-leaning or activists within the security or PR departments. Which if you believe that... lul...

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

#199

Post by 8note »

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…

Lack of available bathrooms across cities is a big problem in and of itself.

Especially with covid, where are you supposed to pee if you're spending all day driving around doing deliveries or as a taxi driver?

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

#200

Post by Turing_Machine »

throwawaysea wrote: post #131
scotu wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what did she say in response? I only saw her tweet and amazon's petty (and misleading) response. Who said she cannot be criticized? I think mostly people are saying that they are cringey liars...

She said it herself. See https://twitter.com/amazonnews/status/1375529101931520007 - in there, Warren says "And fight to break up Big Tech so you’re not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets." That's a direct threat to break up a private entity because it criticized her (a sitting Senator and representative of the federal government).

You're getting modded down for this, of course, but she clearly thinks that only the powerful are entitled to "heckle Senators", and that anyone who "heckles Senators" should be punished.

Bite me, Senator Warren. I'll "heckle" your entitled ass any time I damned well see fit to do so.

Post reply on HN