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

271–280 of 281 posts

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

#271

Post by andonisus »

calcifer wrote: post #270
andonisus wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My opinion is based on this generally being a thing that delivery drivers choose to do. It has been true of long-haul truckers for quite some time (many of them would even take Meth just so they could drive longer and log more miles).

> My opinion is based on this generally being a thing that delivery drivers choose to do. This sentence says nothing. How do you know this is something that people choose to do?

I’ve heard about it while living my life? I don’t know what you want me to say. It’s just something I have been aware of happening long before now. And honestly, I’m not really interested in trying to convince anyone else. If you don’t believe me, that’s cool, but I know what I know. And since you’re too contrarian to even bother looking it up yourself, here is the literal first google result:

https://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/47231

Oh, and here is a literal company that sells a product meant to alleviate the need to urinate in bottles. They speak about such bottle urination near the bottom of the page:

https://www.roadreliefsystem.com/

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

#272

Post by ziddoap »

Rule35 wrote: post #264
ziddoap wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finding your viewpoint disagreeable does not make one dishonest or a "unionist".

But downvoting me because I'm not wrong, but "disagreeable" (read, correct) is dishonest. And no, causation seems to run the other way, apparently being a unionist makes you dishonest.

I didn't say your comment "wasn't wrong, but disagreeable", I said your viewpoint was simply disagreeable (read, not necessarily correct and people obviously disagree with what you have stated (read, they think your incorrect)).

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

#273

Post by munk-a »

Rule35 wrote: post #263
munk-a wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the percentages need work since if 20% of the tens of thousands of drivers you employ/contract do a thing then clearly your hiring policies are pretty terrible. If you worked as a dev and 20% of your co-workers end up committing corporate espionage then the place you work is almost certainly Los Alamos. But I get your point - the issue, I think, is that under-performance in a job role should be a rarity. You…

> A business can essentially hold you hostage with the US unemployment system Thankfully we're talking about contractors and none of that is the case. > I think the percentages need work since if 20% of the tens of thousands of drivers you employ/contract do a thing then clearly your hiring policies are pretty terrible. Not employees, they weren't hired. And the contractors aren't promised anything, they're given a c…

Contractors are employed persons. They're distinct under the law in the US for some fully BS reasons but in every meaningful manner these drivers are employees - they aren't independent courier services that happen to work part-time for Amazon, they're drivers that only run Amazon deliveries but are forced to operate as an independent company for Amazon's benefit.

There are cases where the contractor style of employment is valid and advantageous for the worker. But when it comes to the gig economy contractors are CINO (contractors in name only) - they're employees that companies like treating differently to get out of paying insurance for and that's it.

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

#274

Post by Rule35 »

ziddoap wrote: post #272
Rule35 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But downvoting me because I'm not wrong, but "disagreeable" (read, correct) is dishonest. And no, causation seems to run the other way, apparently being a unionist makes you dishonest.

I didn't say your comment "wasn't wrong, but disagreeable", I said your viewpoint was simply disagreeable (read, not necessarily correct and people obviously disagree with what you have stated (read, they think your incorrect)).

> read, they think your incorrect

Nobody runs through a thread downvoting all your posts because they think you're wrong, they do it because they're mad which means they know you're right.

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

#275

Post by Rule35 »

munk-a wrote: post #273
Rule35 wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A business can essentially hold you hostage with the US unemployment system Thankfully we're talking about contractors and none of that is the case. > I think the percentages need work since if 20% of the tens of thousands of drivers you employ/contract do a thing then clearly your hiring policies are pretty terrible. Not employees, they weren't hired. And the contractors aren't promised anything, they're given a c…

Contractors are employed persons. They're distinct under the law in the US for some fully BS reasons but in every meaningful manner these drivers are employees - they aren't independent courier services that happen to work part-time for Amazon, they're drivers that only run Amazon deliveries but are forced to operate as an independent company for Amazon's benefit. There are cases where the contractor style of employm…

I agree about the legal dodgery here. The way healthcare is available via employers means that contractors and part-time workers are hurt unreasonably. The solution to that is letting people keep their plan when quitting a job, reupping a plan that expired, and mandating set rates where health-insurance costs the same regardless if you're a company or an individual. This stuff is broken.

But contractor vs employee is a useful distinction for everyone and trying to fix all the other issues by neutering what contractor means goes the wrong way.

Contractors, INO or otherwise, have freedom to pick their shift and their employer on almost a daily basis, if not more frequently. Drivers have Uber and Lyft apps open, etc. Amazon drivers can give Bezos the finger and drive for a courier firm with no notice and no black-mark on their employment history.

> in every meaningful manner these drivers are employees - they aren't independent courier services that happen to work part-time for Amazon, they're drivers that only run Amazon deliveries but are forced to operate as an independent company for Amazon's benefit

There's no force involved. Even economic. The drivers drive for them despite having the same job options that non-drivers do, and they choose this.

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

#276

Post by munk-a »

Rule35 wrote: post #275
munk-a wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contractors are employed persons. They're distinct under the law in the US for some fully BS reasons but in every meaningful manner these drivers are employees - they aren't independent courier services that happen to work part-time for Amazon, they're drivers that only run Amazon deliveries but are forced to operate as an independent company for Amazon's benefit. There are cases where the contractor style of employm…

I agree about the legal dodgery here. The way healthcare is available via employers means that contractors and part-time workers are hurt unreasonably. The solution to that is letting people keep their plan when quitting a job, reupping a plan that expired, and mandating set rates where health-insurance costs the same regardless if you're a company or an individual. This stuff is broken. But contractor vs employee is…

> There's no force involved. Even economic. The drivers drive for them despite having the same job options that non-drivers do, and they choose this.

Yea - I think this is the core portion of what makes this more difficult to stomach during a pandemic - the other options are few and far between and the job market is highly distorted right now.

Most folks on HN still have cushy jobs (I work in a healthcare adjacent market so our market segment is actually doing quite fine) but a lot of folks that were either jobless going into covid or were laid off/furloughed due to it are in a hard place. Unemployment laws are such that folks can be forced to take contract gigs if they're available or else fail to qualify for unemployment and that can put folks in a really awkward position financially.

There is some serious exploitation here due to the lack of options. Something like UBI and national healthcare like we've got up here in Canada would seriously improve lives for folks that find themselves unable to cover expenses without working themselves to the bone and I think that everyone should have a right to a pleasant life. It's quite a tough situation.

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

#277

Post by Rule35 »

munk-a wrote: post #276
Rule35 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree about the legal dodgery here. The way healthcare is available via employers means that contractors and part-time workers are hurt unreasonably. The solution to that is letting people keep their plan when quitting a job, reupping a plan that expired, and mandating set rates where health-insurance costs the same regardless if you're a company or an individual. This stuff is broken. But contractor vs employee is…

> There's no force involved. Even economic. The drivers drive for them despite having the same job options that non-drivers do, and they choose this. Yea - I think this is the core portion of what makes this more difficult to stomach during a pandemic - the other options are few and far between and the job market is highly distorted right now. Most folks on HN still have cushy jobs (I work in a healthcare adjacent ma…

> Unemployment laws are such that folks can be forced to take contract gigs

Suitable work definitions can never require you to lose money by working. And that's without the peeing-in-a-bottle type tricks to be more profitable. You're also allowed to include all of your costs (gas, depreciation, etc) in the calculation. If you had a Hummer you'd be paying more for gas than if you had a smart car so the value of the contract changes.

> UBI and national healthcare like we've got up here in Canada would seriously improve lives for folks that find themselves unable to cover expenses without working themselves to the bone

National healthcare is helpful because it covers 'acts of god'. UBI seems like it would be harmful to the economy by inflating itself into irrelevance while destroying wages.

> I think that everyone should have a right to a pleasant life

I think that everyone has the right to pursue that, and must not have unreasonable obstacles placed in their way.

But saying that someone deserves a thing implies that someone else is required to provide it. Your rights can't place a burden on me so that can't be a right.

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

#278

Post by QuixoticQuibit »

syspec wrote: post #269
QuixoticQuibit wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re clearly not being charitable to her if you read her tweet and thought she meant Amazon has to be broken up because their tweets are snarky towards her. She’s saying that Big Tech in general is so powerful—they can do whatever they want—and then snap back at politicians in snarky tweets without a care.

But they SHOULD be able to do that. So should small companies without fear of retribution. The fact that small companies do not, out of fear of retribution by politicians is the actual problem and speaks volumes.

You’re completely missing the point I was making. It’s not about the snarky tweets. It’s about how big and powerful corporations have become.

I don’t know why I’m surprised; HN has shown me more and more that otherwise intelligent people are more than happy to support corporate friendly narratives and anti-progressive ones.

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

#279

Post by munk-a »

Rule35 wrote: post #277
munk-a wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's no force involved. Even economic. The drivers drive for them despite having the same job options that non-drivers do, and they choose this. Yea - I think this is the core portion of what makes this more difficult to stomach during a pandemic - the other options are few and far between and the job market is highly distorted right now. Most folks on HN still have cushy jobs (I work in a healthcare adjacent ma…

> Unemployment laws are such that folks can be forced to take contract gigs Suitable work definitions can never require you to lose money by working. And that's without the peeing-in-a-bottle type tricks to be more profitable. You're also allowed to include all of your costs (gas, depreciation, etc) in the calculation. If you had a Hummer you'd be paying more for gas than if you had a smart car so the value of the co…

> But saying that someone deserves a thing implies that someone else is required to provide it. Your rights can't place a burden on me so that can't be a right.

That's correct - maybe it's more accurate to say that I don't believe anyone else has the right to deprive others of a pleasant life. It goes with my general philosophy to strive to ensure that people I interact with in life find that interaction either neutral or pleasant and don't suffer from my existence.

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

#280

Post by fukmbas »

fotta wrote: post #25

> According to Recode, the suspicious tweets in fact came at the behest of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, who had recently conveyed disappointment to Amazon officials that the company was not pushing back against criticisms that he considered misleading. > But company personnel think Amazon’s aggressive actions on Twitter are “embarrassing.” It's amazing how tone-deaf Bezos sounds.

Find me a billionaire that isn't
Post reply on HN