4 ms·

Chains of consequence are very common. Especially in accidents. I'm defending the idea that Amazon might plan around accidents. That's neither strange nor callo

Chains of consequence are very common. Especially in accidents. I'm defending the idea that Amazon might plan around accidents. That's neither strange nor callous, it's a form of conscientiousness, nothing more. Once again, your life isn't the same as others. Disabled people do die from taxis not arriving, messages not being passed on, etc - because nothing is set up for us, services are not backstopped because able people don't need the backstop. Society isn't built for us, so we have to take our chances all the time, with no failsafe being provided. In some cases, every day. The disabled rarely have the financial resources to be truly safe. Your comment is ableism at its finest.

reificator 8y ago
> Your comment is ableism at its finest. No, it's an internal locus of control. If I went into the Disability Olympics I'm guaranteed at least the bronze. Believe you me when I say we could share some war stories about how the world is not set up to accommodate everyone. That said, my point is that this is not the place to discuss that. It is not acceptable to go into a thread about people who did die in a way they could not have foreseen, and try to force the discussion onto people who could have died. Especially when your scenario hinges on poor planning and reliance on a known unreliable service for critical needs. You're claiming ableism and saying that the world does not accommodate you, while callously downplaying the lives that were lost by people who were trying to do exactly that. If Amazon deliveries are what you rely on to survive, how can you brush off the deaths of those working to bring you those goods?
- rdiddly 8y ago
  Nobody is obligated to talk only about the crew deaths. Arguably it's sanctimonious and tacky to make a big show of "respect" for strangers who died. (Or else you had better publicly mourn everybody else who died from less newsworthy causes.) Meanwhile somebody alive shared a personal experience of being disabled, while making a fairly minor point, and you kind of shat on them.
  - reificator 8y ago
    I'm not sure we read the same thread here. I only brought up the casualties in response to the statement that if you aren't focused on the shipping delay here, you're callous and don't care about the disabled. Being not particularly well off on that front myself, I found that to be an unreasonable and selfish comment, one that attempted to hijack a tragedy to further someone's unrelated agenda. I would fully accept that I could have read into it something that was not there, had it not been for the followup "ableism" comment immediately afterward. If they had approached from a different angle, something like "Remember that this can have knock on effects, my sister is waiting on her insulin delivery and after a particularly rough week a missed delivery could be fatal" it wouldn't have ruffled feathers. Instead it was phrased such that anyone who hadn't considered that concept was morally deficient. You claim to be upset by my "sanctimonious" behavior and yet view the post I responded to as just "sharing a personal experience"?
tzs 8y ago
> Chains of consequence are very common. Especially in accidents. I'm defending the idea that Amazon might plan around accidents. They almost certainly do plan for them. They will find out what shipments were on the plane, update the tracking status for those orders, and either refund those customers or ship replacements to them. It will take some time for Amazon to find out what was on that particular plane, and so even for those customers for whom they decide to ship replacements rather than provide refunds there is no way they will get their items by the original due date. ...and this was a plane crash, which is probably the best case for this. With a plane crash, especially a plane that is specifically contracted for Amazon shipments, Amazon finds out quickly that they have a lost a shipment, and it is then just a matter of finding out which packages were on that plane as opposed to other planes sent out from the same airport. In the far more common cases, such as delays in the rail system, or weather or natural disasters closing down shipping routes, (1) it will take longer for Amazon to even find out there is a problem, and (2) the same problem might affect an immediate shipment of a replacement. It is simply not possible with existing technology, even with the resources of an Amazon, to build the shipping system you seem to want: one that will allow people to order essential items two days before they must have them, and always receive them.

reificator 8y ago

> Your comment is ableism at its finest. No, it's an internal locus of control. If I went into the Disability Olympics I'm guaranteed at least the bronze. Believe you me when I say we could share some war stories about how the world is not set up to accommodate everyone. That said, my point is that this is not the place to discuss that. It is not acceptable to go into a thread about people who did die in a way they could not have foreseen, and try to force the discussion onto people who could have died. Especially when your scenario hinges on poor planning and reliance on a known unreliable service for critical needs. You're claiming ableism and saying that the world does not accommodate you, while callously downplaying the lives that were lost by people who were trying to do exactly that. If Amazon deliveries are what you rely on to survive, how can you brush off the deaths of those working to bring you those goods?

rdiddly 8y ago
Nobody is obligated to talk only about the crew deaths. Arguably it's sanctimonious and tacky to make a big show of "respect" for strangers who died. (Or else you had better publicly mourn everybody else who died from less newsworthy causes.) Meanwhile somebody alive shared a personal experience of being disabled, while making a fairly minor point, and you kind of shat on them.
- reificator 8y ago
  I'm not sure we read the same thread here. I only brought up the casualties in response to the statement that if you aren't focused on the shipping delay here, you're callous and don't care about the disabled. Being not particularly well off on that front myself, I found that to be an unreasonable and selfish comment, one that attempted to hijack a tragedy to further someone's unrelated agenda. I would fully accept that I could have read into it something that was not there, had it not been for the followup "ableism" comment immediately afterward. If they had approached from a different angle, something like "Remember that this can have knock on effects, my sister is waiting on her insulin delivery and after a particularly rough week a missed delivery could be fatal" it wouldn't have ruffled feathers. Instead it was phrased such that anyone who hadn't considered that concept was morally deficient. You claim to be upset by my "sanctimonious" behavior and yet view the post I responded to as just "sharing a personal experience"?

tzs 8y ago

> Chains of consequence are very common. Especially in accidents. I'm defending the idea that Amazon might plan around accidents. They almost certainly do plan for them. They will find out what shipments were on the plane, update the tracking status for those orders, and either refund those customers or ship replacements to them. It will take some time for Amazon to find out what was on that particular plane, and so even for those customers for whom they decide to ship replacements rather than provide refunds there is no way they will get their items by the original due date. ...and this was a plane crash, which is probably the best case for this. With a plane crash, especially a plane that is specifically contracted for Amazon shipments, Amazon finds out quickly that they have a lost a shipment, and it is then just a matter of finding out which packages were on that plane as opposed to other planes sent out from the same airport. In the far more common cases, such as delays in the rail system, or weather or natural disasters closing down shipping routes, (1) it will take longer for Amazon to even find out there is a problem, and (2) the same problem might affect an immediate shipment of a replacement. It is simply not possible with existing technology, even with the resources of an Amazon, to build the shipping system you seem to want: one that will allow people to order essential items two days before they must have them, and always receive them.