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

Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 85 posts

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#61

Post by spfzero »

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #51
sneak wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace "disrupt" with "replace with an improved version" and you have accurately characterized my view. The USPS does an absolutely terrible job, by objective measure. Many of their locations are significantly understaffed, with 30-60 minute waits for basic services (for paying customers!). Rude, unhelpful employees are the norm. Why should package and letter delivery be a public service? Their approach is not worki…

With the exception of wait times for in-person service, I don't really get the impression that the USPS does a worse job than any other delivery service. Mail arrives consistently, on time, and at competitive prices. > Why should package and letter delivery be a public service? Because everyone needs equal access to those services. Everyone, no exceptions, regardless of how profitable it is or not.

For most shipments in the weight categories I use, USPS is the least expensive. It's as reliable as Fed Ex or UPS in my experience. I do go into the post office fairly regularly, and have a PO box as well. Everyone's nice enough, they can answer pretty much any question you have. They're experienced, career employees, rather than franchisees. Yes, you usually have to wait in line for some things, but they have kiosks for simple tasks.

I'm sure others will have had other anecdotal experiences, both bad and good, that's just the nature of a large organization. I've lived in several different cities over time and USPS has been consistently fine.

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#62

Post by spfzero »

notriddle wrote: post #10
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #4

This whole legislation is a huge waste of time as a way to fight fraud and fake products. Do you really expect the consumer to try to track down some person via their address (which may be a PO Box) and try to sue them, only to have them say their merchandise was actually mixed with others and so they are not liable? The much better version is to make Amazon fully liable for everything they sell, even third party mer…

I don’t expect consumers to track down fake Ball lids and Apple chargers. I expect Ball and Apple to do that.

So it would make sense that Ball and Apple would need to find out who the seller was, from Amazon. Amazon at least knows where to send the checks, and likely a lot more about these businesses.

What bothers me about Amazon is that they are actively providing anonymity to enterprises engaged in consumer-hostile activities including fraud, and are resisting efforts to pierce the shield they are providing.

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#63

Post by sio8ohPi »

skak wrote: post #15
technofiend wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you've never heard of competitive addressing, then. Instead of PO BOX 1234, Anytown, ST USA you use Street Address of Post Office, Unit # PO BOX Number, Anytown ST USA. In addition to giving you a "real" street address, it works for any services unable to otherwise deliver to a PO BOX like UPS, Fedex or DHL, because as long as they deliver during business hours, the post office will sign for your package. I use th…

The only reason people on HN have hate for the post office is they are influenced by capitalists who want another industry to “disrupt.” American oligarchs have been declaring war on public services since the New Deal, and over time American workers have sadly been propagandized to buy into it. As a result, the U.S. Post Office is not what it used to be (it used to offer banking services!!!) but it’s still one of the…

As someone who loves to complain about the post office, you're way overthinking it. There's no conspiracy. I just hate spam.

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#64

Post by leipert »

Germany just passed a law that forces Amazon, eBay (or any platform) to be transparent about who you are buying from (company / individuals). Additionally they need to be transparent about how they rank search result and whether the results include paid placements.

German source here: https://www.golem.de/news/bundestag-amazon-und-ebay-zu-mehr-...

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#65

Post by AlexandrB »

sio8ohPi wrote: post #63
skak wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason people on HN have hate for the post office is they are influenced by capitalists who want another industry to “disrupt.” American oligarchs have been declaring war on public services since the New Deal, and over time American workers have sadly been propagandized to buy into it. As a result, the U.S. Post Office is not what it used to be (it used to offer banking services!!!) but it’s still one of the…

As someone who loves to complain about the post office, you're way overthinking it. There's no conspiracy. I just hate spam.

When I was a kid, I had a job delivering spam. A lot it does not come from the post office but from other delivery services.

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#66

Post by midasuni »

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #51
sneak wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace "disrupt" with "replace with an improved version" and you have accurately characterized my view. The USPS does an absolutely terrible job, by objective measure. Many of their locations are significantly understaffed, with 30-60 minute waits for basic services (for paying customers!). Rude, unhelpful employees are the norm. Why should package and letter delivery be a public service? Their approach is not worki…

With the exception of wait times for in-person service, I don't really get the impression that the USPS does a worse job than any other delivery service. Mail arrives consistently, on time, and at competitive prices. > Why should package and letter delivery be a public service? Because everyone needs equal access to those services. Everyone, no exceptions, regardless of how profitable it is or not.

> Because everyone needs equal access to those services. Everyone, no exceptions, regardless of how profitable it is or not.

I can see that argument about food, water, healthcare, maybe even electricity and internet but postal services? It’s pretty low down the “need” pyramid.

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#67

Post by wahern »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #60
wahern wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just in California, but in most of the U.S. and E.U. But if you weren't yourself negligent, you can recover your losses from an upstream supplier. In practice it's manufacturers or importers who bear most of the insurance cost. The whole point of the doctrine is that someone injured by a faulty product shouldn't have to hunt down the negligent party, who may have chosen to sell through a byzantine supply chain in…

What counts as a supplier as far as California is considered? If someone sells a non-functional piece of equipment via Ebay, how does that work? Unlike Amazon ,which some argue is closer to a store, Ebay is an open market where you're buying the product as is and not as an SKU. When does caveat emptor become a consideration?

Strict product liability usually only applies to commercial sellers. That doesn't directly answer your question, but suffice it to say there are bodies of law that exist to answer that question. It's certainly not a new question as flea markets, garage sales, charity drives, and many other situations long predate Amazon and eBay.

Re: Legislation would unmask third-party sellers, but Amazon is fighting it

#69

Post by justin_oaks »

reportingsjr wrote: post #34
aidenn0 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am wondering if Amazon is immune to reputational damage though. People have been complaining about counterfeit and defective products from Amazon for about 5 years now, and it doesn't seem to have had significant effect on market share. I've been disentangling my purchasing habits from Amazon, but I don't know too many other people who are.

I don't think the majority of people care about quality. I think most focus mainly on price. See Walmart for an example of this. They force manufacturers of otherwise decent stuff to make lower quality versions of products to sell only at Walmart, just to lower the end price. Considering that Walmart is one of the largest companies in the world, this seems to be a winning tactic.

People are unable to accurately judge quality before they make a purchase, and often well after the purchase the quality is uncertain too. Who knows how long it'll take before you find out that your cheap USB charger was made of shoddy materials and will catch on fire when it fails?

But you can know the exact price before the purchase.

People are optimizing based on the information they have.

Post reply on HN