19 ms·

Amazon recalls eclipse glasses

290 points by alister 9y ago

Cozumel 9y ago
>'Amazon said customers who did not receive an email purchased glasses that were safe to use.' Or they did receive an email and it went into their spam/junk folder. In a situation like this it might be better to email everyone if only to say your glasses are safe. Although that would open them to legal liability if they're wrong.
- concede_pluto 9y ago
  This. Even before the collapse of email as a writing medium, it was never a life-critical system.
projectileboy 9y ago
Interesting... the real issue here is Amazon's long-standing implicit tolerance of counterfeit goods from disreputable suppliers. I wonder how many more incidents like this it will take before Amazon finally does something.
- slackingoff2017 9y ago
  They won't until consumers wise up. I've stopped using them completely, not worth the gamble. Their price advantage has eroded anyways. I don't see any advantage to buying from them relative to straight from the manufacturer most of the time. Amazon has done a great job squeezing shipping costs and margins. I doubt I pay more than 5% more on anything but I know I'm not getting any fakes
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - 6t6t6t6 9y ago
    Amazon is de-facto a monopoly. The "invisible hand" does not apply here.
    - CamperBob2 9y ago
      That's what the civil court system is for. Nothing invisible about that hand. They are in a world of $#!+ if anyone receives permanent eye damage from counterfeit glasses purchased on Amazon, especially if their insane "inventory commingling" policy turns out to be implicated. The article only talks about the sun appearing too bright through counterfeit glasses, but the real hazard is a pair of glasses that blocks out enough visible light to allow your pupils to dilate, letting in plenty of the UV they don't block.
      - m-j-fox 9y ago
        I love how you spell $#!+.
    - mseebach 9y ago
      No, Amazon is not a monopoly, they are a very large and influential player. You can still buy eclipse glasses (and practically all other products) from other vendors, both physical and online. It may not be as smooth, cheap, fast or convenient as Amazon, but that's pretty damn far from the bar for a monopoly. There was never any guarantee that the invisible hand would fix badness overnight, merely that it will nudge them in the right direction. Which it does.
      - y-satellite 9y ago
        Not anymore, you can't. Just about every supplier on the Internet is sold out at this point.
  - JKCalhoun 9y ago
    Amazon blew it when they invited 3rd party sellers. When it was just Amazon + Their Warehouse you knew what you were getting.
    - marsRoverDev 9y ago
      Even when it is fulfilled by amazon you don't have any guarantee it's not fake.
  - rabidrat 9y ago
    I wanted to buy some Tasty Bites meals. Normally I get them from Costco but they only have one kind and I wanted to try some other flavors. So I went online, found them on Amazon, and literally said to myself "I'd rather buy these directly from the manufacturer". So I went to tastybite.com and filled up my shopping cart and when I went to checkout, it redirected to amazon.com which asked if it was okay to put these items in my Amazon cart.
losteverything 9y ago
Better now than the 22nd. Bravo Amazon. The walmart i know still has them for $1.
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  Bravo? Amazon sells counterfeit shit all over. They're panicking and trying to avoid a tiny bit of the inevitable damage. I bet they'll settle quickly versus risk the full extent of their malicious behaviour become public knowledge.
  - losteverything 9y ago
    Well... Bravo in the sense that by recalling they admit they have counterfeit problem. It is not too late ever for a company to admit they made a mistake. Look at the catholic church
    - valleyer 9y ago
      I don’t think you’re helping your case there with that comparison.
      - losteverything 9y ago
        Yeah. Do over. I was trying to think of an organization that didnt admit to a problem until confronted and obvious. My bad
    - jliptzin 9y ago
      Unfortunately many do not recognize the Catholic Church as just another profit seeking company.
- nebabyte 9y ago
  And as we all know, Walmart is a paragon of valuing quality over cost
joeframbach 9y ago
> "Customers may have purchased counterfeit versions of legitimate products," an Amazon spokesperson said when asked about the issue. Does this have to do with Amazon's practice of commingling goods from various sources together? I imagine in some warehouse, a big box of Panjwani's legit goods all mixed together with some not-so-good-goods.
- MrRadar 9y ago
  This is exactly why I purchased my eclipse glasses directly from the manufacturer (American Paper Optical) even though shipping from them was very expensive (relative to the cost of the glasses). Even if I'd bought a reputable brand directly from Amazon (instead of a reseller) I had no trust that I wouldn't get a counterfeit commingled from an untrustworthy reseller inside Amazon's warehouse.
  - randycupertino 9y ago
    This is so frustrating to me. I want to buy makeup from amazon but there is no way to verify you're not getting fake products.
    - cm2187 9y ago
      I can't find a link so not 100% sure it is a true story but I was told (from a normally reliable source) of a L'Oréal factory in Russia many years ago which was producing shampoo. Unknown to L'Oréal was the fact that at night the factory would run producing counterfeit shampoo with inferior products. L'Oreal found out when they started getting customer complaints from people losing their hair, and I think pulled from Russia.
    - quickthrower2 9y ago
      Wasn't a problem in the 80's
- amirmc 9y ago
  I didn't know Amazon did this. It'll make me think twice next time I purchase certain items. After a quick search I found this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200243180 https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=... Even though inventory tracked using the manufacturer barcode is commingled within the network, the source of the inventory is tracked by our fulfillment systems and is taken into consideration if inventory problems arise. Given the article, it seems they're not completely sure what was sent where. It would seem that using the manufacturer barcodes in Amazon's network opens you up to an unexpected risk.
abirkill 9y ago
This isn't limited to glasses. I purchased a 12x12 sheet of solar filter film from a seller on Amazon, manufactured by Thousand Oaks Optical (who are listed on the American Astronomical Society's list of reputable vendors), and I'm also being refunded. I checked the Thousand Oaks Optical site and they have a list of legitimate resellers of their products, and the Amazon seller I used is listed. I'm surprised Amazon didn't do the same basic checks before e-mailing me. When I was searching for more information after receiving the e-mail, I also found someone on an astronomy forum[1] who is being refunded for a telescope that appears to retail for around $1199. [1] https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/587658-amazon-eclipse-glasses-refund/ https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/587658-amazon-eclipse-gla...
- zkms 9y ago
  I've gotten counterfeit body wash (Shiseido Super Mild) and counterfeit microSD cards off Amazon, and, ironically, the only things I buy off amazon.com now are books, because if they're counterfeit, it'll be obvious, and it certainly won't cause me any harm. Everything else I'd rather buy from the manufacturer (and pay the full, unsubsidised shipping cost -- not Amazon Prime) or a reputable distributor (digi-key/mouser for electronics, CS Hyde for films/tapes, etc). The prospect of having my eyes fried because of counterfeit PPE is kinda horrifying.
- dangrossman 9y ago
  > the Amazon seller I used is listed If it was "fulfilled by Amazon", it doesn't matter what seller you chose, you could have been sent a counterfeit item from another seller. Sellers using fulfillment-by-Amazon send their stock to Amazon's warehouse, where it gets thrown in the same bin as all the other stock of that item from everyone else selling it. When it gets pulled to ship to you, there's no guarantee you get one that came from the authorized seller, versus a counterfeit someone else sent in with the same SKU. Sellers can opt-out of commingling inventory at extra cost but most don't. Given you got a proactive refund, that seller probably has commingled inventory with everyone else, and Amazon is worried they sent you a fake that'll get someone injured and cause them liability.
  - 9y ago
dwaltrip 9y ago
Does anyone have good recommendations for getting a pair as of today (before next weekend)? I'm in the bay area, if that helps.
- bdibs 9y ago
  Check out the retail section on the AAS reputable vendors list[0]. [0] https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters
- JoeDaDude 9y ago
  I just ordered a set from B&H Camera Store in NYC. These are the Lunt glasses that are mentioned in the article, but are also identified by NASA as "safe" [1]. I'm hoping that B&H does not suffer the same counterfeit problems as Amazon. Shipping from NYC to the Bay Area is still a concern though (I'm a lot closer to NYC and just got the e-mail that they shipped on yesterday's order). [1]. https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters
  - forgotpw1123 9y ago
    +1 for B&H. They're replaces amazon for all my audio and general electronics purchases. Generally the same prices without a chance of counterfeits.
  - ConceptJunkie 9y ago
    I specifically ordered from B&H because I was familiar with them and felt I could trust them to have a legit product. The glasses are still in transit, but I should have them in time.
- edaemon 9y ago
  I bought some for $2 in a Fred Meyer (Kroger grocery store) that are certified safe. Those kinds of stores may not stock them further from the eclipse path, though.
  - 9y ago
sixQuarks 9y ago
Here's the email I got, the last sentence had me chuckling. We hope to "see" you soon. ------- Hello, We’re writing to provide you with important safety information about the eclipse products you purchased on Amazon (order #---- for TOLOCO Solar Eclipse Glasses,CE and ISO Certified Safe Solar Shades Filter for Solar Eclipse Viewing (3-Black)). To protect your eyes when viewing the sun or an eclipse, NASA and the American Astronomical Society (AAS) advise you to use solar eclipse glasses or other solar filters from recommended manufacturers. Viewing the sun or an eclipse using any other glasses or filters could result in loss of vision or permanent blindness. Amazon has not received confirmation from the supplier of your order that they sourced the item from a recommended manufacturer. We recommend that you DO NOT use this product to view the sun or the eclipse. Amazon is applying a balance for the purchase price to Your Account (please allow 7-10 days for this to appear on Your Account). There is no need for you to return the product. You can view your available balance and activity here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/css/gc/balance/ https://www.amazon.com/gp/css/gc/balance/ For more information about safely viewing a solar eclipse please see the NASA and AAS websites. If you purchased this item for someone else, please pass along this information to the recipient. We hope to see you again soon. Sincerely, Customer Service
- dhosek 9y ago
  They know they'll see you soon because they're not issuing refunds, they're giving you a balance credit at the big river instead.
- Zhenya 9y ago
  "We hope to see you again soon." Fairly poor choice of words..
  - iamatworknow 9y ago
    They'll see you, but you may or may not see them.
halfnibble 9y ago
How do we still have issues with counterfeit products in 2017? There should be electronic records with audit trails for every shipment into the US. This ordeal is probably going to bankrupt several small businesses.
- tyingq 9y ago
  I'm not sure that helps much. You have the audit trail, find an issue. You inform China, and...nothing happens. Factory changes its name for the next shipment.
- acangiano 9y ago
  Blockchain could help solve this problem.
- forgotpw1123 9y ago
  Because Amazon makes too much money off it to do anything about it. They could easily track everything... but they obviously don't.
- x0x0 9y ago
  Because amazon hasn't been sued enough to care yet.
- s0rce 9y ago
  This problem specifically could be easily solved by not allowing any random seller to sell the same item on Amazon without the purchases having any idea.
  - simonh 9y ago
    I'm not sure what you mean. They do track everything, otherwise they couldn't match up your payment for the product with the vendor it actually came from in order to pay them. The question is what else are Amazon willing to do with that information, which turns out to be very little or nothing because as soon as Amazon gets humans involved in the transaction making actual decisions, their costs shoot up.
jimktrains2 9y ago
I bought a set of 15 supposedly iso certified and tested them all when I got them. Couldn't see light bulbs or anything else but the sun. I wonder if they seller sold a mix of counterfit or just wasn't able to get the certification to amazon as a bulk seller?
- cesarb 9y ago
  > Couldn't see light bulbs or anything else but the sun. Are all the harmful wavelengths visible? What you don't see can hurt you (for instance, see the table at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_safety#Damage_mechanisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_safety#Damage_mechanisms), and depending on the material it could filter some wavelengths but let other wavelengths pass. Testing just with visible light is not enough.
  - jimktrains2 9y ago
    That's not really something I could test readily at home. Additionally, the light bulb test is what the local news was saying is a good quick and dirty test to check for counterfeits. I obviously can't certify them. https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification E1: I'll probably end up getting new ones; I guess you're right. E2: Because everyone cares about my saga, of course, the seller appears to have sold blatantly fraudulent ones as well. Apparently lowes has certified ones, so I'm going to pop in there tomorrow. E3: in classic "pay attention to me" style, but also in the hopes of helping someone else out: https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety my glasses look like the counterfeit version listed on the mfg website.
twoodfin 9y ago
zzalpha predicted this a couple of weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14877216#14877731 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14877216#14877731
Bulkington 9y ago
So our metro library system (well respected) is promoting an eclipse education event, with free viewing glasses. Should the sourcing be suspect? (95% viewing area)
- abirkill 9y ago
  Many libraries have received glasses for free from the Space Science Institute, which is a reputable organisation funded by NASA, the National Science Foundation, and others. There's a map of libraries on their website: http://spacescience.org/software/libraries/map.php http://spacescience.org/software/libraries/map.php If yours is on that list, you should be pretty safe, I think.
taneq 9y ago
Selling "eclipse glasses", or anything else cheap that encourages people to look directly at the sun, is a terrible idea to begin with. All it takes is some muppet to misread (or ignore) the directions and the next thing you know, they're blind and you've got a lawsuit on your hands.
- nebabyte 9y ago
  Talking out of your ass aside, ignoring directions and then suing gives you no recourse. If it did, Mcdonald's would not sell hot coffee.
ams6110 9y ago
I was always taught to never view an eclipse directly with any kind of filter/glasses. Use a simple lens, or even a pinhole, to project the image onto another surface and view it that way.
- Clubber 9y ago
  That's what we did in elementary school last time it happened in our area years ago. I believe we used a shoe box, took off the lid, poked a pin hole on one side and viewed it. Here's a link to it's construction. https://www.livescience.com/33906-solar-eclipse-viewer.html https://www.livescience.com/33906-solar-eclipse-viewer.html I'd say the box the glasses come in from Amazon is probably more useful than the glasses in many cases. :)
- Stratoscope 9y ago
  This is excellent advice! I agree wholeheartedly. Just to add one nuance, this is only needed for the partial eclipse. If you are viewing the total eclipse, use the pinhole projector for the partial phases. But during totality only, it is perfectly safe to view the solar corona with the naked eye, even with binoculars. I went into more detail elsewhere in this thread; search the page for my username for more info.
Stratoscope 9y ago
You don't need eclipse glasses. If you are traveling to (or live in) the zone of totality, don't bother viewing the partial eclipse at all. It's not what you are there for. You are there to experience the total eclipse in all its glory, and you can't use eclipse glasses for that. Your best viewing tool for the total eclipse is your own eyes and a good pair of binoculars. Yes, plain, unfiltered binoculars. During totality you can look directly at the solar corona. Not only do you not need eye protection, but you'll miss the whole thing if you use any kind of filter. This is true only during totality, of course. I recommend doing what hundreds of us did on an Oregon hillside in 1979. During the first partial phase, we put on sunglasses (just ordinary sunglasses) and looked away from the sun. The purpose of this was to get our eyes a bit dark-acclimated, so when it went total we would have an even better view. By looking away from the sun, you also have a chance of seeing the other interesting effects on the ground: the wavy ripply patterns that appear just before totality, and the shadow of the moon as it rushes toward you at thousands of miles per hour! As soon as the eclipse became total, people started yelling "totality!" and we took off our sunglasses, turned around, picked up our binoculars, and enjoyed the awesome experience of seeing the solar corona. The only danger here is that you have to stop looking as soon as the first bit of the Diamond Ring or Baily's Beads appear. Then you're back into the partial eclipse and must use eye protection. But at that point, most of us just cheered and got ready to go home. After totality, the partial eclipse is not much to get excited about. If you're not in the zone of totality, then of course you must not look directly at the sun at any time. But if you don't have quality eclipse glasses, you still have some other good options. One is a piece of #14 arc welder's glass. Another that you can improvise on the spot is a pinhole projector. There are various ways you can make one; at the simplest it can just be two pieces of paper, one that you punch a small hole in with a pin, and the other on the ground or a wall. Hold the paper with the hole so that the sunlight goes through it onto the other. You will get a nice image of the partially eclipsed sun projected onto the other paper. A pinhole projector is the safest way to view the partial eclipse: you are never looking directly at the sun at all, only its projection. There are numerous plans for building slightly more elaborate pinhole projectors. This page has some good tips: http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/how-to-look-at-the-sun/ http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/how-to-look-at... Or search for "solar eclipse pinhole projector" to find more. There is a lot of misinformation going around about eclipse viewing and eye safety. Everything above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, speaking both from personal experience and extensive research. And I've tried to make very clear the difference between the partial and total eclipse. Of course, if I made a mistake or left anything unclear, please let me know! There are two main dangers regarding eye safety. One is that someone may view the partial eclipse without proper eye protection and will destroy their vision. This has happened many times, and it is a real tragedy. The other danger, albeit of a lesser sort, is that many people who travel to the total eclipse zone will mistakenly believe that they need some kind of eye protection during totality. As a result, they will completely miss the awesome, life-changing event they went to so much trouble to see.
quesera 9y ago
If you don't trust Amazon's vendor commingling practices, be sure to test the film: https://www.space.com/37698-solar-eclipse-glasses-safety-check.html https://www.space.com/37698-solar-eclipse-glasses-safety-che...
- hyperpape 9y ago
  This page seems to imply that you can tell if your glasses are safe by seeing whether they block out all but the brightest lights (direct sun or perhaps a LED flashlight). But another page from the AAS seems to say you only get a negative result: if you can see anything other than a very bright light through the glasses, they're unsafe. But that doesn't imply the inverse, that if you can't, they're safe, because of UV protection. https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification Can anyone confirm if I've understood that correctly?
  - bdibs 9y ago
    That's about right, we can't see (with our eyes at least) if the infrared or UV is being filtered.
typpo 9y ago
I ordered the top-rated eclipse glasses on Amazon a few months ago and they were counterfeit. If you put them on during daytime you can see indirect sunlight and even my kitchen light. They were shipped from China despite having "Made in the USA" markings and all the proper ISO certification fine print. I haven't received any communication from Amazon, so people who haven't heard from them should not assume their glasses are safe (contrary to Amazon's statement). I contacted Amazon support and they were quick to initiate a refund. For some reason Amazon rejected my review warning that items from third party sellers may be counterfeit and explaining how to tell. Here are a couple photos of the counterfeits: https://goo.gl/photos/1XRKw8KBgo3hjHx6A https://goo.gl/photos/1XRKw8KBgo3hjHx6A
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  It seems incredibly careless of them to tell people if they did not get an email they're OK. There's no way the impact from refunding everyone that bought any such product outweighs the coming lawsuits. I feel bad for people about to be injured. But hopefully this will screw Amazon hard and make them change their ways.
  - m-j-fox 9y ago
    Isn't it somewhat on the sellers who are willing to blind people for a buck? That's not ok even in China.
    - bdcravens 9y ago
      For a given SKU, Amazon commingles inventory, so who you bought from may not be the company who stocked the FBA shelf with the product. Surely Amazon can trace it back, but I think Amazon lost the "just a marketplace" defense a long time ago as a result.
      - jklein11 9y ago
        Is the process of commingling inventory documented? That policy is slightly alarming. What would stop someone from sending boxes full of rocks to the fulfillment center with the sku of an iPad?
cmurf 9y ago
What goes around comes around. Amazon has been turning a blind eye to counterfeit products for a long time, it's been getting worse, not better. And now that they got a clue this particular fraud could CAUSE WIDESPREAD BLINDNESS, they have to take responsibility for their own cesspool.
- roberto 9y ago
  > turning a blind eye
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  Yeah I hope the discovery resulting from the lawsuit from this issue will be explosive enough to force Amazon to change. If it surfaces that they've been knowingly selling counterfeit products... Wow.
raverbashing 9y ago
Use an old floppy disk to see the eclipse. I'm serious It seems opaque, but it is transparent enough to see the sun
- diggernet 9y ago
  And it's probably every bit as safe as those fake glasses. Don't do this!
- dingaling 9y ago
  That is horrific and likely dangerous "advice". The mylar composite used in floppy disks seems opaque... to visible light. 54% of the Sun's energy output is in other wavelengths. There is no certification that a floppy disk cookie will block those. Plus it has a big hole in the middle, danger of inadvertent viewing. This is like the argument I have with other photographers every eclipse when they try to use their 'super-dark' neutral-density filters. Sure they block ten stops of light, but the IR and UV just sails on through. Unless it's designed and certifed as a Solar viewing material just don't even contemplate it. You're better watching the eclipse on TV in that case.
  - scotty79 9y ago
    Does eye lens focus UV an IR? Or is the amount that goes through the hole of the size of iris enough to do the damage unfocused?
  - raverbashing 9y ago
    > Unless it's designed and certifed as a Solar viewing material just don't even contemplate it. People have been using dark pieces of photographic film to see eclipses since ever. I wonder if there has been studies on its UV transmissibility Thought you're right about the super-dark film and I don't think those are dark enough even on the visible range Though I do agree if you want to stare at it directly your best choice is to get solar viewing glasses (preferably not a fake one) This page has some tests: astronexus.com/gatfaq/solar-filters besides poor optical quality floppy disks allow wavelenghts > 800nm to pass (this is IR range) A good suggestion that seems easy to obtain: welder's glass
cmurf 9y ago
A viable safe test would be a clear (unfrosted) incandescent or halogen bulb on a rheostat. Glasses on, bulb off, turn up the brightness somewhat slowly. You should be able to look directly at the filament comfortably if you have good glasses. If you have fakes, as long as you ramp up brightness slow enough, your natural response to squint will kick in before you wreck your retinas. You definitely do not want to test this on the sun.
- concerned_user 9y ago
  How does it test the fact that glasses block UV part of the spectrum? That is where the damage is coming from not from the the visible part.
kevinthew 9y ago
I'd say about 50-60% of the electronic items I buy from amazon end up being counterfeit. For this reason, I avoid amazon unless it's unimportant stuff.
- forgotpw1123 9y ago
  Yup for me I would say over 30%. I'm sure Consumer Reports will do a study soon and find that near 50% are counterfeit and the stock will drop like a rock.
jdavis703 9y ago
Is there anything particularly dangerous about viewing the sun directly? When I was dumb and young I'd look at the sun for seconds at a time without any problems developing so far. Is the danger that an eclipse encourages you to stare at the sun without encountering any pain?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- taneq 9y ago
  > When I was dumb and young I'd look at the sun for seconds at a time without any problems developing so far. Hopefully this was during hazy sunsets. Or maybe you just have mega-strong pupils that can contract more than normal and that's why you're not blind. > Is the danger that an eclipse encourages you to stare at the sun without encountering any pain? Exactly. Human eyes aren't very good at handling ultra-high-dynamic-range scenes. During an eclipse, your surroundings are somewhere between twilight and night-time in brightness, so your pupils dilate. The small un-covered sliver of sun is still as bright as it is during the day, and can damage your eyes without triggering a painful 'too-bright' response. It's somewhat similar to the danger posed by a laser.
- barrkel 9y ago
  So did I, usually in while bored in class, so a window between me and the sun (blocking UV, for what that's worth). I'd stare until the sun developed an outline in my vision, then look elsewhere until the sunspot in my vision wore off, then I'd do it again. But there are documented cases of eye damage, so the danger is real.
- arcticfox 9y ago
  Exactly. The light doing damage isn't necessarily the visible light that gives you the impulse to avert your eyes, it's the UV. In one study, 50% of the people looking at the eclipse had caused permanent damage to their eyes (sans any precautions or averting their eyes). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/06/30/what-happens-if-you-try-to-watch-the-august-solar-eclipse-without-special-glasses-nothing-good/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/...
mikeash 9y ago
What kind of piece of shit makes these things? It's one thing to make a crappy knockoff phone charger. It may be less efficient and even less safe, but you can probably rationalize it away since they mostly work OK. But this is a piece of safety equipment with a single function, and people only buy it to use it in one way, which will cause direct and immediate harm if the product fails. How can someone live with themselves after doing this?
- kalleboo 9y ago
  > How can someone live with themselves after doing this? By being able to feed their family and keep shelter over their heads. At least that's the only charitable explanation I can think for the absolutely shocking lack of respect for human life that comes out of China (see fake food, gutter oil, electrical safety, construction scandals etc etc)
- xor1 9y ago
  >What kind of piece of shit makes these things? People like my ex's dad. Not involved with this in particular, but lots of fake/knockoff/cheap Chinese shit. Dude is rich as fuck. Rich enough to have bought her a $750k house with cash a few years ago, like it was nothing. Don't know if anything he was involved with ever actually harmed anybody, but from what I've heard he'd have no qualms about it. I'm sure whoever is responsible for this is similar. No rules in China if you're fucking over foreigners. At least none that you can't just bribe your way out of.
- blacksqr 9y ago
  "Après moi le déluge! is the watchword of every capitalist and of every capitalist nation. Hence Capital is reckless of the health or length of life of the labourer, unless under compulsion from society." --Karl Marx s/labourer/consumer/
  - jerf 9y ago
    You know, it does seem like some people need to be reminded that China is nominally Communist. ("It's not real Communism." But it's a real outcome of the attempt to create Communism, so it counts just fine.) The thing is, if you want safety, what you want is a separation between the manufacturer and the regulator. In Communism, the manufacturer and the regulator are de facto the same entity. Communism lacks any entity that is capable of coming out and saying independently that there's a problem. If you've ever complained about "regulatory capture", you've just explained why Communism is non-functional; Communism institutionalizes 100% total regulatory capture from day one and holds it up as an ideal.
oasisbob 9y ago
Buying any PPE from Amazon is probably a bad idea. Counterfeit or not, the barrier to entry is just too low. eg, there are specialized climbing harnesses on Amazon which confuse the CE EN standard and the concept of notified bodies. (Which certify conformity.) Leads to hilarity like a climbing harness claiming conformity with the standards for intubation tubes. Or, climbing equipment which is mislabeled as to its country of origin, with basic specs like dimensions being inaccurate. The sellers just don't care, and Amazon doesn't care enough to stop them. It's barely one step above ebay for a lot of items.
- slavak 9y ago
  > It's barely one step above ebay for a lot of items. Is it, though? At least with eBay I know who the product I ordered came from and whom to blame if something goes wrong. If I'm ordering from the manufacturer's official account on eBay I know I'm not getting sent a cheap Chinese knock-off by some other random eBay seller. With Amazon I apparently don't have that luxury.
- DanBC 9y ago
  I prefer eBay for a lot of stuff now. Amazon is, for me, full of bafflement pricing. Trying to work out what I need to buy to get free shipping becomes impossible because of the Prime Only deals, the Add On items, the difference in shipping between books only or other stuff. Now I just buy all books from Wordery and everything else from eBay.
sundvor 9y ago
> "We want customers to buy with confidence anytime they make a purchase on Amazon.com" That's a bit rich, what with the 2nd hand camera lens scam the other day and all.
- nebabyte 9y ago
  I once took for granted that that was in Amzn's best interests and thus their goal, but it really just seems like they're hoping to bank on consumar ignorance/apathy and being the biggest game in town. It sucks because I recently picked up an amzn gift card from a change conversion machine (my bank now requires you roll your change yourself and I discovered those machines are fee-free if you use them for a giftcard), but I've fewer and fewer needs from Amzn now.
wtvanhest 9y ago
I posted 32 days ago asking how to tell if they are real [1]. Amazon informed me that they are fake. Unfortunately I have no way to buy glasses now and will use the pin whole method, but its pretty dissapointing. I hope no one gets hurt [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14755020 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14755020
- TAeGTrVNmP 9y ago
  I've got some extras that I'm willing to share. E-mail me your address and I'll mail you a pair. I'm in SoCal so they should arrive in SF in time for the eclipse. I got mine directly from one of the NASA-approved suppliers, precisely because I don't trust Amazon anymore. Had to order a small batch, even though I only needed a few: I figured not going blind is worth ~$30.
  - wtvanhest 9y ago
    Wow, thanks! What is your email? Mine is in my profile.
    - TAeGTrVNmP 9y ago
      Hmm, I don't see it. Maybe my karma's not high enough? Looks like my e-mail's not visible either; sorry I'm not too familiar with HN's system. Anyway, my e-mail is [HN account name] at x0.ms.
      - wtvanhest 9y ago
        I just saw this. I appreciate you offering, but I missed my window as I will be out of town for a wedding. I appreciate the offer!
  - SeoxyS 9y ago
    I'm not the person you're replying to, but I'd love to grab a pair from you too if you have extra :) ; and to pay for its cost / shipping to SF of course.
jlarocco 9y ago
I hope this is a wake up call for Amazon and they start cleaning up and cutting back the third party sellers. It's to the point where I don't bother checking Amazon for a lot of things because I know it will be too hard to find a legit seller.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
Houshalter 9y ago
How dangerous is it to watch a solar eclipse without proper dark glasses? I recall a Feynman story where he watched the first nuclear bomb test without eye protection, just through the window of a truck. Under the theory that normal glass filters most UV light.
- shawn-butler 9y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_retinopathy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_retinopathy The damage is usually reversible.. loss of vision returns usually within 12 months.
- Stratoscope 9y ago
  Well, Feynman was one of the most brilliant scientists in history, but he was also quite insane. (As one of his students, I say this with a great deal of love and respect for him!) To answer your question, though, we need to distinguish between a partial eclipse and a total eclipse. You had best use eye protection for a partial eclipse, or even better, use a pinhole projector as I described elsewhere in this thread. (Search the page for my username.) But a total eclipse is perfectly safe to view with the naked eye, and even with binoculars! You could use a telescope, but binoculars give you a better field of view. Either way, you're not looking at the sun any more, you're looking at the solar corona. During totality, the sun is completely blocked by the moon itself. This is a much more substantial filter than anything you could ever buy on Amazon.
  - DiThi 9y ago
    > But a total eclipse is perfectly safe to view with the naked eye, and even with binoculars! But one must be careful. As soon as the moon stops blocking the sun, there are sun rays concentrated in a tiny point. Like looking at the point of a powerful laser, it doesn't feel as powerful as it actually is. Esp. regarding invisible wavelengths.
yAnonymous 9y ago
Not only are there massive amounts of counterfeit products on Amazon, they also encourage it by letting the sellers fake reviews. Here's how they do it: * Collect positive reviews on a cheap article. * Change the product, but not the article ID. The new article then has the reviews of the old one. * Finally, they lock the reviews by setting the article to "not released yet", even though the product is for sale. That way, you get positive reviews for a shitty product and customers can't add negative reviews. Amazon don't do anything about this, even though it's clearly deceptive and, at least here, against the law.
stevewillows 9y ago
Instead of risking my vision on some goofy glasses from an unknown supplier, I'm banking on recreating a small camera obscura setup that I did in elementary school. [1] https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/make-pinhole-projector.html https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/make-pinhole-projector.h...
davidmurdoch 9y ago
American Paper Optics made a page showing the differences between their glasses and some knock offs. https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety This doesn't mean the shape can't also be copied perfectly though, so I'm not sure if it's helpful or just doing even more harm.
dboreham 9y ago
Poorly handled by Amazon because the _absence_ of an email (there is no other way to tell, for example from the order page on the amazon web site) signifies that the glasses are safe. So if the email get spam filtered or otherwise doesn't reach the appropriate person, they have no idea that the product isn't safe. The order page should say "not safe" or "safe" so people can check themselves.
dboreham 9y ago
Reading the comments here, I wonder if folks have read the article? The problem seems to be not that Amazon has recalled counterfeit items but rather they have recalled legitimate product, blaming the legitimate seller for the fact that Amazon can't keep straight where their safety-critical inventory came from. It is as if they have a bin for "Viagra" in the warehouse into which they put shipments from Pfizer, along with whatever comes in from their eBay-grade sellers. Then they blame Pfizer for the eBay drugs not being properly traceable and tested. Source: I received the emails, read the article, and at least one of the products I received is certainly not counterfeit.
- martin-adams 9y ago
  I've heard of retailers complaining of the same thing over the past few years. I don't know what really goes on, but certainly mixing multiple suppliers of stock in the same bin is a huge headache when counterfeit products get mixed in. Legitimate retailers get bad reviews and customers don't get what they pay for. I have received a counterfeit product from Amazon and I thought they were going to handle it excellently, but then they dropped the ball asking me to return a dangerous item to the seller for them to pass it on to the next person. I refused and fortunately got a refund, but all the effort was on me.
- saosebastiao 9y ago
  Amazon wanted the savings of commingling without the expense and investment in proper systems for it. For accurate accounting of the source of a piece of commingled inventory, you need sku-level inventories with unit-level accounting. This is expensive, because it means each unit needs to be individually marked (e.g. a sticker with a unique ID number) upon receipt, which is more labor intensive than just counting them and sticking them on a shelf. Amazon's sku and bin level accounting works perfectly fine for items that have a single origin. Shoehorning commingled inventory into that same system doesn't work. It was reckless, and they should bear the punative cost for its results.
  - woliveirajr 9y ago
    Well, what amazes me is that it seems to have be done this way for a long time, no? If so, it has a very low amount of problems and complains, since they could grow so big. If bad suppliers were a constant, they would be bad-mouthed enough and wouldn't have grown that big. Or their inner working is better than this article implies...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
zelos 9y ago
>"Safety is among our highest priorities... That's an odd way for Amazon to put it. Presumably not injuring your customers is priority number one in most businesses?
imroot 9y ago
This is one of the serious problems with FBA and serious problems with FBA's co-mingled inventory. When I was selling inventory on Amazon, I actually paid the extra cash to have my inventory placed in a separate location so that I didn't have to deal with other seller's stock/quality issues. It was worth the additional cost (from my point of view) and it worked quite well in ensuring that Amazon's customers who sourced from my stock got the correct product and that I didn't have to deal with angry customers or unexplained returns.
PhrosTT 9y ago
So how long can I safely look at the eclipse WITHOUT glasses. Can I take like 5 second glances? Is there some minimum rest period between them? (I ordered glasses but will assume they are fake).
- monster_group 9y ago
  If you love your eyes, the answer is zero.
- jayofdoom 9y ago
  If you look at the eclipse at all without glasses, you will cause permanent eye damage. It's worse than looking directly at a sun NOT during an eclipse. Don't do what you suggest. Seriously.
  - PhrosTT 9y ago
    OK.. I just assumed it was the same at staring at the sun... except without the blinding light that normally forces you to look away due to pain. On further research looks like something about your eye having a specific point to focus on which gets damaged immediately. Thanks.

290 points by alister 9y ago

>'Amazon said customers who did not receive an email purchased glasses that were safe to use.' Or they did receive an email and it went into their spam/junk folder. In a situation like this it might be better to email everyone if only to say your glasses are safe. Although that would open them to legal liability if they're wrong.

concede_pluto 9y ago
This. Even before the collapse of email as a writing medium, it was never a life-critical system.

projectileboy 9y ago

Interesting... the real issue here is Amazon's long-standing implicit tolerance of counterfeit goods from disreputable suppliers. I wonder how many more incidents like this it will take before Amazon finally does something.

slackingoff2017 9y ago
They won't until consumers wise up. I've stopped using them completely, not worth the gamble. Their price advantage has eroded anyways. I don't see any advantage to buying from them relative to straight from the manufacturer most of the time. Amazon has done a great job squeezing shipping costs and margins. I doubt I pay more than 5% more on anything but I know I'm not getting any fakes
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- 6t6t6t6 9y ago
  Amazon is de-facto a monopoly. The "invisible hand" does not apply here.
  - CamperBob2 9y ago
    That's what the civil court system is for. Nothing invisible about that hand. They are in a world of $#!+ if anyone receives permanent eye damage from counterfeit glasses purchased on Amazon, especially if their insane "inventory commingling" policy turns out to be implicated. The article only talks about the sun appearing too bright through counterfeit glasses, but the real hazard is a pair of glasses that blocks out enough visible light to allow your pupils to dilate, letting in plenty of the UV they don't block.
    - m-j-fox 9y ago
      I love how you spell $#!+.
  - mseebach 9y ago
    No, Amazon is not a monopoly, they are a very large and influential player. You can still buy eclipse glasses (and practically all other products) from other vendors, both physical and online. It may not be as smooth, cheap, fast or convenient as Amazon, but that's pretty damn far from the bar for a monopoly. There was never any guarantee that the invisible hand would fix badness overnight, merely that it will nudge them in the right direction. Which it does.
    - y-satellite 9y ago
      Not anymore, you can't. Just about every supplier on the Internet is sold out at this point.
- JKCalhoun 9y ago
  Amazon blew it when they invited 3rd party sellers. When it was just Amazon + Their Warehouse you knew what you were getting.
  - marsRoverDev 9y ago
    Even when it is fulfilled by amazon you don't have any guarantee it's not fake.
- rabidrat 9y ago
  I wanted to buy some Tasty Bites meals. Normally I get them from Costco but they only have one kind and I wanted to try some other flavors. So I went online, found them on Amazon, and literally said to myself "I'd rather buy these directly from the manufacturer". So I went to tastybite.com and filled up my shopping cart and when I went to checkout, it redirected to amazon.com which asked if it was okay to put these items in my Amazon cart.

losteverything 9y ago

Better now than the 22nd. Bravo Amazon. The walmart i know still has them for $1.

MichaelGG 9y ago
Bravo? Amazon sells counterfeit shit all over. They're panicking and trying to avoid a tiny bit of the inevitable damage. I bet they'll settle quickly versus risk the full extent of their malicious behaviour become public knowledge.
- losteverything 9y ago
  Well... Bravo in the sense that by recalling they admit they have counterfeit problem. It is not too late ever for a company to admit they made a mistake. Look at the catholic church
  - valleyer 9y ago
    I don’t think you’re helping your case there with that comparison.
    - losteverything 9y ago
      Yeah. Do over. I was trying to think of an organization that didnt admit to a problem until confronted and obvious. My bad
  - jliptzin 9y ago
    Unfortunately many do not recognize the Catholic Church as just another profit seeking company.
nebabyte 9y ago
And as we all know, Walmart is a paragon of valuing quality over cost

joeframbach 9y ago

> "Customers may have purchased counterfeit versions of legitimate products," an Amazon spokesperson said when asked about the issue. Does this have to do with Amazon's practice of commingling goods from various sources together? I imagine in some warehouse, a big box of Panjwani's legit goods all mixed together with some not-so-good-goods.

MrRadar 9y ago
This is exactly why I purchased my eclipse glasses directly from the manufacturer (American Paper Optical) even though shipping from them was very expensive (relative to the cost of the glasses). Even if I'd bought a reputable brand directly from Amazon (instead of a reseller) I had no trust that I wouldn't get a counterfeit commingled from an untrustworthy reseller inside Amazon's warehouse.
- randycupertino 9y ago
  This is so frustrating to me. I want to buy makeup from amazon but there is no way to verify you're not getting fake products.
  - cm2187 9y ago
    I can't find a link so not 100% sure it is a true story but I was told (from a normally reliable source) of a L'Oréal factory in Russia many years ago which was producing shampoo. Unknown to L'Oréal was the fact that at night the factory would run producing counterfeit shampoo with inferior products. L'Oreal found out when they started getting customer complaints from people losing their hair, and I think pulled from Russia.
  - quickthrower2 9y ago
    Wasn't a problem in the 80's
amirmc 9y ago
I didn't know Amazon did this. It'll make me think twice next time I purchase certain items. After a quick search I found this: https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200243180 https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=... Even though inventory tracked using the manufacturer barcode is commingled within the network, the source of the inventory is tracked by our fulfillment systems and is taken into consideration if inventory problems arise. Given the article, it seems they're not completely sure what was sent where. It would seem that using the manufacturer barcodes in Amazon's network opens you up to an unexpected risk.

abirkill 9y ago

This isn't limited to glasses. I purchased a 12x12 sheet of solar filter film from a seller on Amazon, manufactured by Thousand Oaks Optical (who are listed on the American Astronomical Society's list of reputable vendors), and I'm also being refunded. I checked the Thousand Oaks Optical site and they have a list of legitimate resellers of their products, and the Amazon seller I used is listed. I'm surprised Amazon didn't do the same basic checks before e-mailing me. When I was searching for more information after receiving the e-mail, I also found someone on an astronomy forum[1] who is being refunded for a telescope that appears to retail for around $1199. [1] https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/587658-amazon-eclipse-glasses-refund/ https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/587658-amazon-eclipse-gla...

zkms 9y ago
I've gotten counterfeit body wash (Shiseido Super Mild) and counterfeit microSD cards off Amazon, and, ironically, the only things I buy off amazon.com now are books, because if they're counterfeit, it'll be obvious, and it certainly won't cause me any harm. Everything else I'd rather buy from the manufacturer (and pay the full, unsubsidised shipping cost -- not Amazon Prime) or a reputable distributor (digi-key/mouser for electronics, CS Hyde for films/tapes, etc). The prospect of having my eyes fried because of counterfeit PPE is kinda horrifying.
dangrossman 9y ago
> the Amazon seller I used is listed If it was "fulfilled by Amazon", it doesn't matter what seller you chose, you could have been sent a counterfeit item from another seller. Sellers using fulfillment-by-Amazon send their stock to Amazon's warehouse, where it gets thrown in the same bin as all the other stock of that item from everyone else selling it. When it gets pulled to ship to you, there's no guarantee you get one that came from the authorized seller, versus a counterfeit someone else sent in with the same SKU. Sellers can opt-out of commingling inventory at extra cost but most don't. Given you got a proactive refund, that seller probably has commingled inventory with everyone else, and Amazon is worried they sent you a fake that'll get someone injured and cause them liability.
- 9y ago

dwaltrip 9y ago

Does anyone have good recommendations for getting a pair as of today (before next weekend)? I'm in the bay area, if that helps.

bdibs 9y ago
Check out the retail section on the AAS reputable vendors list[0]. [0] https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters
JoeDaDude 9y ago
I just ordered a set from B&H Camera Store in NYC. These are the Lunt glasses that are mentioned in the article, but are also identified by NASA as "safe" [1]. I'm hoping that B&H does not suffer the same counterfeit problems as Amazon. Shipping from NYC to the Bay Area is still a concern though (I'm a lot closer to NYC and just got the e-mail that they shipped on yesterday's order). [1]. https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters https://eclipse.aas.org/resources/solar-filters
- forgotpw1123 9y ago
  +1 for B&H. They're replaces amazon for all my audio and general electronics purchases. Generally the same prices without a chance of counterfeits.
- ConceptJunkie 9y ago
  I specifically ordered from B&H because I was familiar with them and felt I could trust them to have a legit product. The glasses are still in transit, but I should have them in time.
edaemon 9y ago
I bought some for $2 in a Fred Meyer (Kroger grocery store) that are certified safe. Those kinds of stores may not stock them further from the eclipse path, though.
- 9y ago

sixQuarks 9y ago

Here's the email I got, the last sentence had me chuckling. We hope to "see" you soon. ------- Hello, We’re writing to provide you with important safety information about the eclipse products you purchased on Amazon (order #---- for TOLOCO Solar Eclipse Glasses,CE and ISO Certified Safe Solar Shades Filter for Solar Eclipse Viewing (3-Black)). To protect your eyes when viewing the sun or an eclipse, NASA and the American Astronomical Society (AAS) advise you to use solar eclipse glasses or other solar filters from recommended manufacturers. Viewing the sun or an eclipse using any other glasses or filters could result in loss of vision or permanent blindness. Amazon has not received confirmation from the supplier of your order that they sourced the item from a recommended manufacturer. We recommend that you DO NOT use this product to view the sun or the eclipse. Amazon is applying a balance for the purchase price to Your Account (please allow 7-10 days for this to appear on Your Account). There is no need for you to return the product. You can view your available balance and activity here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/css/gc/balance/ https://www.amazon.com/gp/css/gc/balance/ For more information about safely viewing a solar eclipse please see the NASA and AAS websites. If you purchased this item for someone else, please pass along this information to the recipient. We hope to see you again soon. Sincerely, Customer Service

dhosek 9y ago
They know they'll see you soon because they're not issuing refunds, they're giving you a balance credit at the big river instead.
Zhenya 9y ago
"We hope to see you again soon." Fairly poor choice of words..
- iamatworknow 9y ago
  They'll see you, but you may or may not see them.

halfnibble 9y ago

How do we still have issues with counterfeit products in 2017? There should be electronic records with audit trails for every shipment into the US. This ordeal is probably going to bankrupt several small businesses.

tyingq 9y ago
I'm not sure that helps much. You have the audit trail, find an issue. You inform China, and...nothing happens. Factory changes its name for the next shipment.
acangiano 9y ago
Blockchain could help solve this problem.
forgotpw1123 9y ago
Because Amazon makes too much money off it to do anything about it. They could easily track everything... but they obviously don't.
x0x0 9y ago
Because amazon hasn't been sued enough to care yet.
s0rce 9y ago
This problem specifically could be easily solved by not allowing any random seller to sell the same item on Amazon without the purchases having any idea.
- simonh 9y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean. They do track everything, otherwise they couldn't match up your payment for the product with the vendor it actually came from in order to pay them. The question is what else are Amazon willing to do with that information, which turns out to be very little or nothing because as soon as Amazon gets humans involved in the transaction making actual decisions, their costs shoot up.

jimktrains2 9y ago

I bought a set of 15 supposedly iso certified and tested them all when I got them. Couldn't see light bulbs or anything else but the sun. I wonder if they seller sold a mix of counterfit or just wasn't able to get the certification to amazon as a bulk seller?

cesarb 9y ago
> Couldn't see light bulbs or anything else but the sun. Are all the harmful wavelengths visible? What you don't see can hurt you (for instance, see the table at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_safety#Damage_mechanisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_safety#Damage_mechanisms), and depending on the material it could filter some wavelengths but let other wavelengths pass. Testing just with visible light is not enough.
- jimktrains2 9y ago
  That's not really something I could test readily at home. Additionally, the light bulb test is what the local news was saying is a good quick and dirty test to check for counterfeits. I obviously can't certify them. https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification E1: I'll probably end up getting new ones; I guess you're right. E2: Because everyone cares about my saga, of course, the seller appears to have sold blatantly fraudulent ones as well. Apparently lowes has certified ones, so I'm going to pop in there tomorrow. E3: in classic "pay attention to me" style, but also in the hopes of helping someone else out: https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety my glasses look like the counterfeit version listed on the mfg website.

twoodfin 9y ago

zzalpha predicted this a couple of weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14877216#14877731 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14877216#14877731

Bulkington 9y ago

So our metro library system (well respected) is promoting an eclipse education event, with free viewing glasses. Should the sourcing be suspect? (95% viewing area)

abirkill 9y ago
Many libraries have received glasses for free from the Space Science Institute, which is a reputable organisation funded by NASA, the National Science Foundation, and others. There's a map of libraries on their website: http://spacescience.org/software/libraries/map.php http://spacescience.org/software/libraries/map.php If yours is on that list, you should be pretty safe, I think.

taneq 9y ago

Selling "eclipse glasses", or anything else cheap that encourages people to look directly at the sun, is a terrible idea to begin with. All it takes is some muppet to misread (or ignore) the directions and the next thing you know, they're blind and you've got a lawsuit on your hands.

nebabyte 9y ago
Talking out of your ass aside, ignoring directions and then suing gives you no recourse. If it did, Mcdonald's would not sell hot coffee.

ams6110 9y ago

I was always taught to never view an eclipse directly with any kind of filter/glasses. Use a simple lens, or even a pinhole, to project the image onto another surface and view it that way.

Clubber 9y ago
That's what we did in elementary school last time it happened in our area years ago. I believe we used a shoe box, took off the lid, poked a pin hole on one side and viewed it. Here's a link to it's construction. https://www.livescience.com/33906-solar-eclipse-viewer.html https://www.livescience.com/33906-solar-eclipse-viewer.html I'd say the box the glasses come in from Amazon is probably more useful than the glasses in many cases. :)
Stratoscope 9y ago
This is excellent advice! I agree wholeheartedly. Just to add one nuance, this is only needed for the partial eclipse. If you are viewing the total eclipse, use the pinhole projector for the partial phases. But during totality only, it is perfectly safe to view the solar corona with the naked eye, even with binoculars. I went into more detail elsewhere in this thread; search the page for my username for more info.

Stratoscope 9y ago

You don't need eclipse glasses. If you are traveling to (or live in) the zone of totality, don't bother viewing the partial eclipse at all. It's not what you are there for. You are there to experience the total eclipse in all its glory, and you can't use eclipse glasses for that. Your best viewing tool for the total eclipse is your own eyes and a good pair of binoculars. Yes, plain, unfiltered binoculars. During totality you can look directly at the solar corona. Not only do you not need eye protection, but you'll miss the whole thing if you use any kind of filter. This is true only during totality, of course. I recommend doing what hundreds of us did on an Oregon hillside in 1979. During the first partial phase, we put on sunglasses (just ordinary sunglasses) and looked away from the sun. The purpose of this was to get our eyes a bit dark-acclimated, so when it went total we would have an even better view. By looking away from the sun, you also have a chance of seeing the other interesting effects on the ground: the wavy ripply patterns that appear just before totality, and the shadow of the moon as it rushes toward you at thousands of miles per hour! As soon as the eclipse became total, people started yelling "totality!" and we took off our sunglasses, turned around, picked up our binoculars, and enjoyed the awesome experience of seeing the solar corona. The only danger here is that you have to stop looking as soon as the first bit of the Diamond Ring or Baily's Beads appear. Then you're back into the partial eclipse and must use eye protection. But at that point, most of us just cheered and got ready to go home. After totality, the partial eclipse is not much to get excited about. If you're not in the zone of totality, then of course you must not look directly at the sun at any time. But if you don't have quality eclipse glasses, you still have some other good options. One is a piece of #14 arc welder's glass. Another that you can improvise on the spot is a pinhole projector. There are various ways you can make one; at the simplest it can just be two pieces of paper, one that you punch a small hole in with a pin, and the other on the ground or a wall. Hold the paper with the hole so that the sunlight goes through it onto the other. You will get a nice image of the partially eclipsed sun projected onto the other paper. A pinhole projector is the safest way to view the partial eclipse: you are never looking directly at the sun at all, only its projection. There are numerous plans for building slightly more elaborate pinhole projectors. This page has some good tips: http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/how-to-look-at-the-sun/ http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/how-to-look-at... Or search for "solar eclipse pinhole projector" to find more. There is a lot of misinformation going around about eclipse viewing and eye safety. Everything above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, speaking both from personal experience and extensive research. And I've tried to make very clear the difference between the partial and total eclipse. Of course, if I made a mistake or left anything unclear, please let me know! There are two main dangers regarding eye safety. One is that someone may view the partial eclipse without proper eye protection and will destroy their vision. This has happened many times, and it is a real tragedy. The other danger, albeit of a lesser sort, is that many people who travel to the total eclipse zone will mistakenly believe that they need some kind of eye protection during totality. As a result, they will completely miss the awesome, life-changing event they went to so much trouble to see.

quesera 9y ago

If you don't trust Amazon's vendor commingling practices, be sure to test the film: https://www.space.com/37698-solar-eclipse-glasses-safety-check.html https://www.space.com/37698-solar-eclipse-glasses-safety-che...

hyperpape 9y ago
This page seems to imply that you can tell if your glasses are safe by seeing whether they block out all but the brightest lights (direct sun or perhaps a LED flashlight). But another page from the AAS seems to say you only get a negative result: if you can see anything other than a very bright light through the glasses, they're unsafe. But that doesn't imply the inverse, that if you can't, they're safe, because of UV protection. https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification https://eclipse.aas.org/eye-safety/iso-certification Can anyone confirm if I've understood that correctly?
- bdibs 9y ago
  That's about right, we can't see (with our eyes at least) if the infrared or UV is being filtered.

typpo 9y ago

I ordered the top-rated eclipse glasses on Amazon a few months ago and they were counterfeit. If you put them on during daytime you can see indirect sunlight and even my kitchen light. They were shipped from China despite having "Made in the USA" markings and all the proper ISO certification fine print. I haven't received any communication from Amazon, so people who haven't heard from them should not assume their glasses are safe (contrary to Amazon's statement). I contacted Amazon support and they were quick to initiate a refund. For some reason Amazon rejected my review warning that items from third party sellers may be counterfeit and explaining how to tell. Here are a couple photos of the counterfeits: https://goo.gl/photos/1XRKw8KBgo3hjHx6A https://goo.gl/photos/1XRKw8KBgo3hjHx6A

MichaelGG 9y ago
It seems incredibly careless of them to tell people if they did not get an email they're OK. There's no way the impact from refunding everyone that bought any such product outweighs the coming lawsuits. I feel bad for people about to be injured. But hopefully this will screw Amazon hard and make them change their ways.
- m-j-fox 9y ago
  Isn't it somewhat on the sellers who are willing to blind people for a buck? That's not ok even in China.
  - bdcravens 9y ago
    For a given SKU, Amazon commingles inventory, so who you bought from may not be the company who stocked the FBA shelf with the product. Surely Amazon can trace it back, but I think Amazon lost the "just a marketplace" defense a long time ago as a result.
    - jklein11 9y ago
      Is the process of commingling inventory documented? That policy is slightly alarming. What would stop someone from sending boxes full of rocks to the fulfillment center with the sku of an iPad?

cmurf 9y ago

What goes around comes around. Amazon has been turning a blind eye to counterfeit products for a long time, it's been getting worse, not better. And now that they got a clue this particular fraud could CAUSE WIDESPREAD BLINDNESS, they have to take responsibility for their own cesspool.

roberto 9y ago
> turning a blind eye
MichaelGG 9y ago
Yeah I hope the discovery resulting from the lawsuit from this issue will be explosive enough to force Amazon to change. If it surfaces that they've been knowingly selling counterfeit products... Wow.

raverbashing 9y ago

Use an old floppy disk to see the eclipse. I'm serious It seems opaque, but it is transparent enough to see the sun

diggernet 9y ago
And it's probably every bit as safe as those fake glasses. Don't do this!
dingaling 9y ago
That is horrific and likely dangerous "advice". The mylar composite used in floppy disks seems opaque... to visible light. 54% of the Sun's energy output is in other wavelengths. There is no certification that a floppy disk cookie will block those. Plus it has a big hole in the middle, danger of inadvertent viewing. This is like the argument I have with other photographers every eclipse when they try to use their 'super-dark' neutral-density filters. Sure they block ten stops of light, but the IR and UV just sails on through. Unless it's designed and certifed as a Solar viewing material just don't even contemplate it. You're better watching the eclipse on TV in that case.
- scotty79 9y ago
  Does eye lens focus UV an IR? Or is the amount that goes through the hole of the size of iris enough to do the damage unfocused?
- raverbashing 9y ago
  > Unless it's designed and certifed as a Solar viewing material just don't even contemplate it. People have been using dark pieces of photographic film to see eclipses since ever. I wonder if there has been studies on its UV transmissibility Thought you're right about the super-dark film and I don't think those are dark enough even on the visible range Though I do agree if you want to stare at it directly your best choice is to get solar viewing glasses (preferably not a fake one) This page has some tests: astronexus.com/gatfaq/solar-filters besides poor optical quality floppy disks allow wavelenghts > 800nm to pass (this is IR range) A good suggestion that seems easy to obtain: welder's glass

cmurf 9y ago

A viable safe test would be a clear (unfrosted) incandescent or halogen bulb on a rheostat. Glasses on, bulb off, turn up the brightness somewhat slowly. You should be able to look directly at the filament comfortably if you have good glasses. If you have fakes, as long as you ramp up brightness slow enough, your natural response to squint will kick in before you wreck your retinas. You definitely do not want to test this on the sun.

concerned_user 9y ago
How does it test the fact that glasses block UV part of the spectrum? That is where the damage is coming from not from the the visible part.

kevinthew 9y ago

I'd say about 50-60% of the electronic items I buy from amazon end up being counterfeit. For this reason, I avoid amazon unless it's unimportant stuff.

forgotpw1123 9y ago
Yup for me I would say over 30%. I'm sure Consumer Reports will do a study soon and find that near 50% are counterfeit and the stock will drop like a rock.

jdavis703 9y ago

Is there anything particularly dangerous about viewing the sun directly? When I was dumb and young I'd look at the sun for seconds at a time without any problems developing so far. Is the danger that an eclipse encourages you to stare at the sun without encountering any pain?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
taneq 9y ago
> When I was dumb and young I'd look at the sun for seconds at a time without any problems developing so far. Hopefully this was during hazy sunsets. Or maybe you just have mega-strong pupils that can contract more than normal and that's why you're not blind. > Is the danger that an eclipse encourages you to stare at the sun without encountering any pain? Exactly. Human eyes aren't very good at handling ultra-high-dynamic-range scenes. During an eclipse, your surroundings are somewhere between twilight and night-time in brightness, so your pupils dilate. The small un-covered sliver of sun is still as bright as it is during the day, and can damage your eyes without triggering a painful 'too-bright' response. It's somewhat similar to the danger posed by a laser.
barrkel 9y ago
So did I, usually in while bored in class, so a window between me and the sun (blocking UV, for what that's worth). I'd stare until the sun developed an outline in my vision, then look elsewhere until the sunspot in my vision wore off, then I'd do it again. But there are documented cases of eye damage, so the danger is real.
arcticfox 9y ago
Exactly. The light doing damage isn't necessarily the visible light that gives you the impulse to avert your eyes, it's the UV. In one study, 50% of the people looking at the eclipse had caused permanent damage to their eyes (sans any precautions or averting their eyes). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/06/30/what-happens-if-you-try-to-watch-the-august-solar-eclipse-without-special-glasses-nothing-good/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/...

mikeash 9y ago

What kind of piece of shit makes these things? It's one thing to make a crappy knockoff phone charger. It may be less efficient and even less safe, but you can probably rationalize it away since they mostly work OK. But this is a piece of safety equipment with a single function, and people only buy it to use it in one way, which will cause direct and immediate harm if the product fails. How can someone live with themselves after doing this?

kalleboo 9y ago
> How can someone live with themselves after doing this? By being able to feed their family and keep shelter over their heads. At least that's the only charitable explanation I can think for the absolutely shocking lack of respect for human life that comes out of China (see fake food, gutter oil, electrical safety, construction scandals etc etc)
xor1 9y ago
>What kind of piece of shit makes these things? People like my ex's dad. Not involved with this in particular, but lots of fake/knockoff/cheap Chinese shit. Dude is rich as fuck. Rich enough to have bought her a $750k house with cash a few years ago, like it was nothing. Don't know if anything he was involved with ever actually harmed anybody, but from what I've heard he'd have no qualms about it. I'm sure whoever is responsible for this is similar. No rules in China if you're fucking over foreigners. At least none that you can't just bribe your way out of.
blacksqr 9y ago
"Après moi le déluge! is the watchword of every capitalist and of every capitalist nation. Hence Capital is reckless of the health or length of life of the labourer, unless under compulsion from society." --Karl Marx s/labourer/consumer/
- jerf 9y ago
  You know, it does seem like some people need to be reminded that China is nominally Communist. ("It's not real Communism." But it's a real outcome of the attempt to create Communism, so it counts just fine.) The thing is, if you want safety, what you want is a separation between the manufacturer and the regulator. In Communism, the manufacturer and the regulator are de facto the same entity. Communism lacks any entity that is capable of coming out and saying independently that there's a problem. If you've ever complained about "regulatory capture", you've just explained why Communism is non-functional; Communism institutionalizes 100% total regulatory capture from day one and holds it up as an ideal.

oasisbob 9y ago

Buying any PPE from Amazon is probably a bad idea. Counterfeit or not, the barrier to entry is just too low. eg, there are specialized climbing harnesses on Amazon which confuse the CE EN standard and the concept of notified bodies. (Which certify conformity.) Leads to hilarity like a climbing harness claiming conformity with the standards for intubation tubes. Or, climbing equipment which is mislabeled as to its country of origin, with basic specs like dimensions being inaccurate. The sellers just don't care, and Amazon doesn't care enough to stop them. It's barely one step above ebay for a lot of items.

slavak 9y ago
> It's barely one step above ebay for a lot of items. Is it, though? At least with eBay I know who the product I ordered came from and whom to blame if something goes wrong. If I'm ordering from the manufacturer's official account on eBay I know I'm not getting sent a cheap Chinese knock-off by some other random eBay seller. With Amazon I apparently don't have that luxury.
DanBC 9y ago
I prefer eBay for a lot of stuff now. Amazon is, for me, full of bafflement pricing. Trying to work out what I need to buy to get free shipping becomes impossible because of the Prime Only deals, the Add On items, the difference in shipping between books only or other stuff. Now I just buy all books from Wordery and everything else from eBay.

sundvor 9y ago

> "We want customers to buy with confidence anytime they make a purchase on Amazon.com" That's a bit rich, what with the 2nd hand camera lens scam the other day and all.

nebabyte 9y ago
I once took for granted that that was in Amzn's best interests and thus their goal, but it really just seems like they're hoping to bank on consumar ignorance/apathy and being the biggest game in town. It sucks because I recently picked up an amzn gift card from a change conversion machine (my bank now requires you roll your change yourself and I discovered those machines are fee-free if you use them for a giftcard), but I've fewer and fewer needs from Amzn now.

wtvanhest 9y ago

I posted 32 days ago asking how to tell if they are real [1]. Amazon informed me that they are fake. Unfortunately I have no way to buy glasses now and will use the pin whole method, but its pretty dissapointing. I hope no one gets hurt [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14755020 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14755020

TAeGTrVNmP 9y ago
I've got some extras that I'm willing to share. E-mail me your address and I'll mail you a pair. I'm in SoCal so they should arrive in SF in time for the eclipse. I got mine directly from one of the NASA-approved suppliers, precisely because I don't trust Amazon anymore. Had to order a small batch, even though I only needed a few: I figured not going blind is worth ~$30.
- wtvanhest 9y ago
  Wow, thanks! What is your email? Mine is in my profile.
  - TAeGTrVNmP 9y ago
    Hmm, I don't see it. Maybe my karma's not high enough? Looks like my e-mail's not visible either; sorry I'm not too familiar with HN's system. Anyway, my e-mail is [HN account name] at x0.ms.
    - wtvanhest 9y ago
      I just saw this. I appreciate you offering, but I missed my window as I will be out of town for a wedding. I appreciate the offer!
- SeoxyS 9y ago
  I'm not the person you're replying to, but I'd love to grab a pair from you too if you have extra :) ; and to pay for its cost / shipping to SF of course.

jlarocco 9y ago

I hope this is a wake up call for Amazon and they start cleaning up and cutting back the third party sellers. It's to the point where I don't bother checking Amazon for a lot of things because I know it will be too hard to find a legit seller.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

Houshalter 9y ago

How dangerous is it to watch a solar eclipse without proper dark glasses? I recall a Feynman story where he watched the first nuclear bomb test without eye protection, just through the window of a truck. Under the theory that normal glass filters most UV light.

shawn-butler 9y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_retinopathy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_retinopathy The damage is usually reversible.. loss of vision returns usually within 12 months.
Stratoscope 9y ago
Well, Feynman was one of the most brilliant scientists in history, but he was also quite insane. (As one of his students, I say this with a great deal of love and respect for him!) To answer your question, though, we need to distinguish between a partial eclipse and a total eclipse. You had best use eye protection for a partial eclipse, or even better, use a pinhole projector as I described elsewhere in this thread. (Search the page for my username.) But a total eclipse is perfectly safe to view with the naked eye, and even with binoculars! You could use a telescope, but binoculars give you a better field of view. Either way, you're not looking at the sun any more, you're looking at the solar corona. During totality, the sun is completely blocked by the moon itself. This is a much more substantial filter than anything you could ever buy on Amazon.
- DiThi 9y ago
  > But a total eclipse is perfectly safe to view with the naked eye, and even with binoculars! But one must be careful. As soon as the moon stops blocking the sun, there are sun rays concentrated in a tiny point. Like looking at the point of a powerful laser, it doesn't feel as powerful as it actually is. Esp. regarding invisible wavelengths.

yAnonymous 9y ago

Not only are there massive amounts of counterfeit products on Amazon, they also encourage it by letting the sellers fake reviews. Here's how they do it: * Collect positive reviews on a cheap article. * Change the product, but not the article ID. The new article then has the reviews of the old one. * Finally, they lock the reviews by setting the article to "not released yet", even though the product is for sale. That way, you get positive reviews for a shitty product and customers can't add negative reviews. Amazon don't do anything about this, even though it's clearly deceptive and, at least here, against the law.

stevewillows 9y ago

Instead of risking my vision on some goofy glasses from an unknown supplier, I'm banking on recreating a small camera obscura setup that I did in elementary school. [1] https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/make-pinhole-projector.html https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/make-pinhole-projector.h...

davidmurdoch 9y ago

American Paper Optics made a page showing the differences between their glasses and some knock offs. https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety https://www.eclipseglasses.com/pages/safety This doesn't mean the shape can't also be copied perfectly though, so I'm not sure if it's helpful or just doing even more harm.

dboreham 9y ago

Poorly handled by Amazon because the _absence_ of an email (there is no other way to tell, for example from the order page on the amazon web site) signifies that the glasses are safe. So if the email get spam filtered or otherwise doesn't reach the appropriate person, they have no idea that the product isn't safe. The order page should say "not safe" or "safe" so people can check themselves.

dboreham 9y ago

Reading the comments here, I wonder if folks have read the article? The problem seems to be not that Amazon has recalled counterfeit items but rather they have recalled legitimate product, blaming the legitimate seller for the fact that Amazon can't keep straight where their safety-critical inventory came from. It is as if they have a bin for "Viagra" in the warehouse into which they put shipments from Pfizer, along with whatever comes in from their eBay-grade sellers. Then they blame Pfizer for the eBay drugs not being properly traceable and tested. Source: I received the emails, read the article, and at least one of the products I received is certainly not counterfeit.

martin-adams 9y ago
I've heard of retailers complaining of the same thing over the past few years. I don't know what really goes on, but certainly mixing multiple suppliers of stock in the same bin is a huge headache when counterfeit products get mixed in. Legitimate retailers get bad reviews and customers don't get what they pay for. I have received a counterfeit product from Amazon and I thought they were going to handle it excellently, but then they dropped the ball asking me to return a dangerous item to the seller for them to pass it on to the next person. I refused and fortunately got a refund, but all the effort was on me.
saosebastiao 9y ago
Amazon wanted the savings of commingling without the expense and investment in proper systems for it. For accurate accounting of the source of a piece of commingled inventory, you need sku-level inventories with unit-level accounting. This is expensive, because it means each unit needs to be individually marked (e.g. a sticker with a unique ID number) upon receipt, which is more labor intensive than just counting them and sticking them on a shelf. Amazon's sku and bin level accounting works perfectly fine for items that have a single origin. Shoehorning commingled inventory into that same system doesn't work. It was reckless, and they should bear the punative cost for its results.
- woliveirajr 9y ago
  Well, what amazes me is that it seems to have be done this way for a long time, no? If so, it has a very low amount of problems and complains, since they could grow so big. If bad suppliers were a constant, they would be bad-mouthed enough and wouldn't have grown that big. Or their inner working is better than this article implies...

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

zelos 9y ago

>"Safety is among our highest priorities... That's an odd way for Amazon to put it. Presumably not injuring your customers is priority number one in most businesses?

imroot 9y ago

This is one of the serious problems with FBA and serious problems with FBA's co-mingled inventory. When I was selling inventory on Amazon, I actually paid the extra cash to have my inventory placed in a separate location so that I didn't have to deal with other seller's stock/quality issues. It was worth the additional cost (from my point of view) and it worked quite well in ensuring that Amazon's customers who sourced from my stock got the correct product and that I didn't have to deal with angry customers or unexplained returns.

PhrosTT 9y ago

So how long can I safely look at the eclipse WITHOUT glasses. Can I take like 5 second glances? Is there some minimum rest period between them? (I ordered glasses but will assume they are fake).

monster_group 9y ago
If you love your eyes, the answer is zero.
jayofdoom 9y ago
If you look at the eclipse at all without glasses, you will cause permanent eye damage. It's worse than looking directly at a sun NOT during an eclipse. Don't do what you suggest. Seriously.
- PhrosTT 9y ago
  OK.. I just assumed it was the same at staring at the sun... except without the blinding light that normally forces you to look away due to pain. On further research looks like something about your eye having a specific point to focus on which gets damaged immediately. Thanks.