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

Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 351 posts

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#291

Post by rantwasp »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #281
marketingPro wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPS emits an EMF, should be easy catch if you are trying. Also, I wonder if you can catch it with batteries. Does amazon make the seller list the type of battery in their product?

I very much doubt any returns are scanned for GPS wavelength EMF.

this sounds like someone who isn’t thinking about all the edge cases for nuts returning stuff. i would not be surprised if there was a protocol in place for screening against all kinds of things (with emf being the small potatoes)

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#292

Post by gjs278 »

RandomBacon wrote: post #167
sabujp wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

goes straight to /dev/null

Unless it has changed, I received a response from some executive team and my request was granted (I missed a substantial Kindle sale by a day, and asked if they would still honor the price).

why did you waste the time emailing jeff for that? you’re the reason we can’t have an open line with him.

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#293

Post by ByteJockey »

mcv wrote: post #283
Fnoord wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people in The Netherlands [1] use Bol.com (part of Ahold; Albert Heijn's parent company). However, Amazon.de (Germany) is also popular, and you can avoid S&H with Amazon Prime. The reason there is no huge Amazon.nl is the same reason there's no huge eBay.nl; there's already a large local competitor: Bol.com (and Marktplaats.nl). Because of Amazon Prime Germany being popular in NL, Amazon introduced an Amazon…

> It is called "The Netherlands"; not "Netherland". That's an archaic Anglicism in my opinion. Nobody in Netherland calls the country "de Nederlanden", and probably hasn't in two centuries. I think it's about time that English finally followed suit.

> I think it's about time that English finally followed suit.

Why? Do you think that languages should all follow the same rules about everything?

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#294

Post by srveale »

arsome wrote: post #269
inopinatus wrote: post #265

Let's take a moment to look at how disingenuous this article is: * Out of twelve returned trackers, one of them went to landfill. The article focuses on that item and does not itemise the fate of the others. * Adding a tracking device to a returned new product is tantamount to damage. If such a device is detected during returns processing, anyone with half a brain should immediately presume a malicious actor and have…

Canadian tax dollars at work... They got sued a few years back for some ridiculous food allegations in a similar vein too.

Are you talking about when they said Subway chicken was only 50% chicken? Subway sued, lost, and had to pay legal fees. Pretty happy with that use of my taxes tbh.

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#295

Post by darepublic »

arsome wrote: post #269
inopinatus wrote: post #265

Let's take a moment to look at how disingenuous this article is: * Out of twelve returned trackers, one of them went to landfill. The article focuses on that item and does not itemise the fate of the others. * Adding a tracking device to a returned new product is tantamount to damage. If such a device is detected during returns processing, anyone with half a brain should immediately presume a malicious actor and have…

Canadian tax dollars at work... They got sued a few years back for some ridiculous food allegations in a similar vein too.

Yea the CBC takes its cue from left wing American media which it poorly imitates

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#296

Post by refurb »

inopinatus wrote: post #265

Let's take a moment to look at how disingenuous this article is: * Out of twelve returned trackers, one of them went to landfill. The article focuses on that item and does not itemise the fate of the others. * Adding a tracking device to a returned new product is tantamount to damage. If such a device is detected during returns processing, anyone with half a brain should immediately presume a malicious actor and have…

This crap is why journalism is in such disrepute.

And this is from the Canadian Broadcasting Company - Canada's gov't funded TV/radio/print news service, not some fly by night organization focused on spitting out content to maximize ad impressions.

Doesn't give you much hope for quality reporting if they can't get it right.

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#297

Post by 9HZZRfNlpR »

jolux wrote: post #267
9HZZRfNlpR wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, and I suggest you to talk with few men before doing sexist remarks about clothing sizes and talking anecdotes as ultimate truth.

What part of "I have experienced both sides of this issue" don't you understand? My best friend is a man and I lived as a man for 20 years. I think I'm at least somewhat qualified to compare the experience of buying clothes as a man vs buying clothes as a woman.

You're not qualified to make such broad, sexist statements just because you have a husband. Get yourself together and do better.

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#298

Post by hermanradtke »

inopinatus wrote: post #265

Let's take a moment to look at how disingenuous this article is: * Out of twelve returned trackers, one of them went to landfill. The article focuses on that item and does not itemise the fate of the others. * Adding a tracking device to a returned new product is tantamount to damage. If such a device is detected during returns processing, anyone with half a brain should immediately presume a malicious actor and have…

I don't disagree with your assertion that the article is disingenuous. However,

> "30-40 percent of online purchases are returned" what absolute hoopsla. I've worked in online commerce and this is off by an order of magnitude. A very few segments (e.g. shoes) may approach such return rates.

In the online retail world, a 30-40% return rate is common for apparel (clothes), shoes and accessory purchases. Certain categories, such as occasion (wedding, party, etc) could be significantly higher than 40%.

Source: I was an executive at a Nordstrom subsidiary for many years.

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#299

Post by dragonwriter »

9HZZRfNlpR wrote: post #297
jolux wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of "I have experienced both sides of this issue" don't you understand? My best friend is a man and I lived as a man for 20 years. I think I'm at least somewhat qualified to compare the experience of buying clothes as a man vs buying clothes as a woman.

You're not qualified to make such broad, sexist statements just because you have a husband. Get yourself together and do better.

“Women’s clothing has less consistent sizing than men’s clothing” is not a sexist statement.

“Get yourself together and do better,” as you say.

Re: Cameras and secret trackers reveal where Amazon returns end up

#300

Post by ummonk »

> Kevin Lyons, an associate professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey who specializes in supply chain management and environmental policy, says that 30 to 40 per cent of all online purchases are sent back. That number drops to less than ten per cent for merchandise bought at bricks and mortar stores.

What the hell? I rarely return either, but find myself returning online merchandise even less often than brick and mortar simply because of the inconvenience of managing packing and shipping.

How are people returning 30-40% of everything they purchase online?

Post reply on HN