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

Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 184 posts

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#171

Post by paulie_a »

ams6110 wrote: post #153
hatchnyc wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've noticed that Uber drivers tend to drive much slower and more cautiously than taxi drivers, and break traffic laws far less often. As a result when I really need to get somewhere quickly I do tend to look for a taxi first.

Question, are Uber drivers penalized for speeding or hard cornering, stopping, etc. that would indicate aggressive driving? I would assume Uber could know this based on GPS and accelerometer readings from the driver's app.

I am highly doubtful. Uber GPS is terrible in general so I'm guessing they don't have that level of granularity. Plus what do you define as aggressive driving? It can vary depending on traffic flow and patterns of the area.

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#172

Post by ionised »

pathseeker wrote: post #164
TeMPOraL wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cost savings/increased efficiency is the name of the game I'd say "socializing losses, privatizing gains" is the name of the game. Those popular disruptive startups dump plenty of externalities on everyone around them. Don't think for a moment that anyone there is increasing efficiency for the sake of increasing efficiency globally; it's just disrupting the society and hoping money pours through the cracks.

>hose popular disruptive startups dump plenty of externalities on everyone around them. Don't think for a moment that anyone there is increasing efficiency for the sake of increasing efficiency globally Pretty lame analysis. There are lots of companies that are in it to do good or actually improve society. I'd even argue that society is net better off with Lyft (not sure about Uber) even though working there as an em…

> Pretty lame analysis. There are lots of companies that are in it to do good or actually improve society.

Like who?

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#174

Post by [deleted] »

rootusrootus wrote: post #159
jasode wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I offer this advice to Amazon -- ditch the marketplace. No more third party sellers. But for many things I shop for, that would be extremely inconvenient for me. For example, I needed to buy replacement fuses for a Fluke multimeter. Amazon itself didn't sell it but a 3rd-party marketplace seller did. If the marketplace was shut down, I'd have to go through the hassle of registering a new account on yet another ecomm…

That sounds like a good match for eBay, though. Amazon is presenting itself as a store, eBay is presenting itself as a marketplace. In the same way I would run Amazon into the ground, I would suggest to eBay to embrace the marketplace and phase out the auction aspect. This is why I'm a software engineer and not a retail tycoon ;-).

[deleted]

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#175

Post by CaptainZapp »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #169
pathseeker wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>hose popular disruptive startups dump plenty of externalities on everyone around them. Don't think for a moment that anyone there is increasing efficiency for the sake of increasing efficiency globally Pretty lame analysis. There are lots of companies that are in it to do good or actually improve society. I'd even argue that society is net better off with Lyft (not sure about Uber) even though working there as an em…

> There are lots of companies that are in it to do good or actually improve society. I don't disagree. They rarely get media attention though, and I don't mention them here, because their disruption is a quite different thing from Uber/AirBnB disruption. For that "lame analysis" part, I'll give you a task: given that you wrote there are lots of such companies, name three . ;). > I'd even argue that society is net bet…

Not just general "taxi regulations", but also traffic safety (a common story to hear was Uber without valid insurance) and tax laws (in my country, I remember our equivalent of IRS being the most active in hunting down Uber drivers).

Don't forget mandatory rest periods, enforced by technical means. My ex-girlfriend used to drive taxis and if you got caught breaking your mandatory rest period the fines were sky-high. Repeat offenders lose their taxi license.

Contrast that to the nice Uber driver, who has no restrictions on driving you around after a double shift at the widget factory and a couple of double whiskies to drown his sorrows, before picking up passengers as an "independent contractor"

What really seems lost on some of the more libertarian inclined, regulation hating chaps here is that most regulation is actually there for a reason. Among other things like protecting your life and health.

When people here start to delve into the "evil hotel lobby that is so mean to this scrappy AirBnb start-up, which sends all their communication 'with love'" then I usually want to start to gag.

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#176

Post by CaptainZapp »

plankers wrote: post #105
reaperducer wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon... I can only speculate what’s going on there. Maybe the resulting price pressure turns the screws on suppliers? Scammers looking for places to scam, which Amazon provides by relying on customer ratings to police its suppliers, which clearly doesn't work. Most of the recent SV business models only work in a hypothetical place where everyone is good and altruistic. Look at self-driving cars. There are thousands…

Oh man, can't wait to see the future graffiti all over self-driving cars. Tech dystopia, here we come! But for real, it's for these reasons that Google et al. place such a high value on systems to identify and deanonymize people. In a world where all of your biometric data can be easily identified and linked back to you, there won't be much room for bad behavior. The real question is who gets to decide what behavior…

In a world where all of your biometric data can be easily identified and linked back to you, there won't be much room for bad behavior.

That's a world that I sure as shit never want to inhabit.

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#177

Post by CamelCaseName »

bloopernova wrote: post #30
ineedasername wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the ability to create fake reviews that can (far) outnumber the negative, I'm surprised sellers bother that much like this... I wonder if a legitimate negative review somehow has more "signal to noise" in it in terms of how it's shown and received by buyers.

It's gotten to the point where I won't buy from sellers with names that look like they're from a password generator set to "letters only, human pronounceable" I did send amazon fraud dept a detailed email about my experiences and the new company selling the exact same items. Amazon needs to have a vastly larger fraud department staffed with actual humans, instead of automated systems that people can game very easily.…

You want to know the best way, in my experience, to see if an Amazon seller is legitimate?

Check if their seller name is trademarked with the USPTO.

Trademarks take 9 months to get, and aren't necessary to sell on Amazon, but a real business will usually trademark its name.

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#178

Post by bloopernova »

CamelCaseName wrote: post #177
bloopernova wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's gotten to the point where I won't buy from sellers with names that look like they're from a password generator set to "letters only, human pronounceable" I did send amazon fraud dept a detailed email about my experiences and the new company selling the exact same items. Amazon needs to have a vastly larger fraud department staffed with actual humans, instead of automated systems that people can game very easily.…

You want to know the best way, in my experience, to see if an Amazon seller is legitimate? Check if their seller name is trademarked with the USPTO. Trademarks take 9 months to get, and aren't necessary to sell on Amazon, but a real business will usually trademark its name.

That sounds like a Firefox/Chrome extension waiting to be written ;)

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#179

Post by barrow-rider »

nindalf wrote: post #78
decebalus1 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "socializing losses, privatizing gains" Never seen this formulated as such but I really like it. I was reading a book which tangentially dealt with that [0]. It changed my perspective on how new businesses are increasingly externalizing their costs to the consumers. [0] https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Work-Unpaid-Unseen-Jobs/dp/161...

I'm not sure why it isn't more common to see that on HN. On reddit, it's reliably one of the top comments in such threads.

Gonna guess a bias to entrepreneurs who are actively trying to cash in on externalities and opportunities for arbitrage, etc.

Re: Amazon, Amid Crackdown on Seller Scams, Fires Employees Over Data Leak

#180

Post by barrow-rider »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #176
plankers wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man, can't wait to see the future graffiti all over self-driving cars. Tech dystopia, here we come! But for real, it's for these reasons that Google et al. place such a high value on systems to identify and deanonymize people. In a world where all of your biometric data can be easily identified and linked back to you, there won't be much room for bad behavior. The real question is who gets to decide what behavior…

In a world where all of your biometric data can be easily identified and linked back to you, there won't be much room for bad behavior. That's a world that I sure as shit never want to inhabit.

"John C. Doe III, according to hair and skin cell analysis on flakes left in the AUTO-CAR V9 you were transported in on

2027 SEPT 19th,

you are being fined

$300 DOLLARS

for improper behavior. Said behavior was

DIGITAL PENETRATION, NASAL

IMPROPER DISPOSAL / DISPERSAL OF BODILY FLUIDS (NASAL)

LEWD OR IMPROPER CONDUCT (NOSE-PICKING)

Fine will be assessed from your credit number on file. Have a nice day."

Post reply on HN