4 ms·

Disclaimer: Amazon employee, opinions are my own This claim really doesn't say much on its own. There are millions (billions?) of products on Amazon. This woul

Disclaimer: Amazon employee, opinions are my own This claim really doesn't say much on its own. There are millions (billions?) of products on Amazon. This would be potentially a lot more damning if they released how many items they searched through to identify those 4,152. It would also be nice if they provided some data on how prevalent these problems are at other retailers and marketplaces. There's reason to believe the problem is probably worse at Amazon (automated approval process, historic emphasis on low cost and selection) but how much worse is it?

tsunamifury 7y ago
Wow. Amazon sells unsafe and banned products and you literally quote the first line of the narcissist prayer: “it’s not a big deal”
- dang 7y ago
  That crosses into personal attack, which isn't ok here. Also, please don't use quotation marks to make it look like you're quoting some when you're not. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - tsunamifury 7y ago
    You are right of course, but in light of defending truly bad decisions, how else do we help our community hold itself responsible for its decisions at work?
    - dang 7y ago
      I'm not sure I saw the GP "defending truly bad decisions", but the answer in such cases is to explain why the decisions are bad without breaking the site guidelines. The guidelines are there to prevent the community from destroying itself, so they're a precondition for "helping our community to hold itself responsible" and other higher-order activities of that sort.
      - tsunamifury 7y ago
        I'm sure your answer is right from an enlightened rationalist position, and I respect your desire to defend the community. Unfortunately I believe there should also be room for stronger emotional responses to truly damaging behavior in the real world. And I suppose finally going separate way from this community is required for that value.
  - ryanobjc 7y ago
    Hmm disagree. This was a very lightweight “hey you’re defending a pretty terrible act”. Surely there is value to socially pressuring people who offer morally reprehensible positions? My child had one of these low quality, high lead toys amazon sells. Babies put everything in their mouth. He was exposed to, minimal, but as we know there is no safe exposure limit to lead. So, dang, tell em again how this amazon employee defending putting lead into children’s bloodstreams is... well I guess I just shouldn’t personally attack them, just the terrible things they are defending.
    - dang 7y ago
      "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - dralley 7y ago
    It was fairly clear to me that he was quoting the narcissist's prayer, although maybe that's just because I've seen it before.
NoodleIncident 7y ago
Quoted from some other comment's quote: > At one point in 2013, some Amazon employees began scanning randomly selected third-party products in Amazon warehouses for lead content, say people familiar with the tests. Around 10% of the products tested failed, one says.
insulanus 7y ago
That's a good point about the rate of the unsafe products, but that is not the same as the rate at which those products are introduced into the population (due to lower prices, etc). It's not valid to compare the rate of unsafe products on Walmart / Target shelves vs. in the Amazon inventory. Amazon is allowed much more slack (similar to eBay) about what gets sold through their store. Also, it is much more appropriate for Amazon to do this work, than have the public do it. Keep up the good work on other fronts!
mbesto 7y ago
> It would also be nice if they provided some data on how prevalent these problems are at other retailers and marketplaces. Good point, but I think the point is that any mass violation (let's say more than 10 SKUs) is usually an isolated event (e.g. it's one small retailer in a local environment), as opposed to "this is just the cost of doing business for any large retailer". The more apt question would be - how many violations happen in the past at a place like Walmart. Traditional retailers are slow to introduce SKUs compared to Amazon simply for this reason - everything is hand curated and has to go through gates to ensure safety. > There's reason to believe the problem is probably worse at Amazon What other marketplace in the western world has nearly as many SKUs? Like even in the same stratosphere? I'd be amazed if there is anyone even close. It's easy to manage that many SKUs at scale when you get to ignore regulation that has legitimate human safety implications. So, that's what the article is saying - don't consolidate power if you're unwilling to deal with edge cases.
ryanobjc 7y ago
My child had a wooden painted toy from amazon. He sucked on it. Later we discovered that it has unacceptable levels of lead in the paint. We threw it out. This was done via an environmental science company, using xrf field testing. I have a certified report. So, tell me again about how this isn’t a big deal problem. Also remind me what the date limit of lead exposure is. Actually I’ll do that one for you, it’s easy, it’s 0. There is no safe exposure to lead. The fact that amazon could do something but is deliberately not is, well, expected. Sadly. Safe products isn’t in the mission statement of amazon. Finally: I worked at amazon for 5 years. Right before fba came online. It’s a cost cutting culture of frugalism. Spending money on product safety doesn’t have a place there.

tsunamifury 7y ago

Wow. Amazon sells unsafe and banned products and you literally quote the first line of the narcissist prayer: “it’s not a big deal”

dang 7y ago
That crosses into personal attack, which isn't ok here. Also, please don't use quotation marks to make it look like you're quoting some when you're not. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- tsunamifury 7y ago
  You are right of course, but in light of defending truly bad decisions, how else do we help our community hold itself responsible for its decisions at work?
  - dang 7y ago
    I'm not sure I saw the GP "defending truly bad decisions", but the answer in such cases is to explain why the decisions are bad without breaking the site guidelines. The guidelines are there to prevent the community from destroying itself, so they're a precondition for "helping our community to hold itself responsible" and other higher-order activities of that sort.
    - tsunamifury 7y ago
      I'm sure your answer is right from an enlightened rationalist position, and I respect your desire to defend the community. Unfortunately I believe there should also be room for stronger emotional responses to truly damaging behavior in the real world. And I suppose finally going separate way from this community is required for that value.
- ryanobjc 7y ago
  Hmm disagree. This was a very lightweight “hey you’re defending a pretty terrible act”. Surely there is value to socially pressuring people who offer morally reprehensible positions? My child had one of these low quality, high lead toys amazon sells. Babies put everything in their mouth. He was exposed to, minimal, but as we know there is no safe exposure limit to lead. So, dang, tell em again how this amazon employee defending putting lead into children’s bloodstreams is... well I guess I just shouldn’t personally attack them, just the terrible things they are defending.
  - dang 7y ago
    "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dralley 7y ago
  It was fairly clear to me that he was quoting the narcissist's prayer, although maybe that's just because I've seen it before.

NoodleIncident 7y ago

Quoted from some other comment's quote: > At one point in 2013, some Amazon employees began scanning randomly selected third-party products in Amazon warehouses for lead content, say people familiar with the tests. Around 10% of the products tested failed, one says.

insulanus 7y ago

That's a good point about the rate of the unsafe products, but that is not the same as the rate at which those products are introduced into the population (due to lower prices, etc). It's not valid to compare the rate of unsafe products on Walmart / Target shelves vs. in the Amazon inventory. Amazon is allowed much more slack (similar to eBay) about what gets sold through their store. Also, it is much more appropriate for Amazon to do this work, than have the public do it. Keep up the good work on other fronts!

mbesto 7y ago

> It would also be nice if they provided some data on how prevalent these problems are at other retailers and marketplaces. Good point, but I think the point is that any mass violation (let's say more than 10 SKUs) is usually an isolated event (e.g. it's one small retailer in a local environment), as opposed to "this is just the cost of doing business for any large retailer". The more apt question would be - how many violations happen in the past at a place like Walmart. Traditional retailers are slow to introduce SKUs compared to Amazon simply for this reason - everything is hand curated and has to go through gates to ensure safety. > There's reason to believe the problem is probably worse at Amazon What other marketplace in the western world has nearly as many SKUs? Like even in the same stratosphere? I'd be amazed if there is anyone even close. It's easy to manage that many SKUs at scale when you get to ignore regulation that has legitimate human safety implications. So, that's what the article is saying - don't consolidate power if you're unwilling to deal with edge cases.

ryanobjc 7y ago

My child had a wooden painted toy from amazon. He sucked on it. Later we discovered that it has unacceptable levels of lead in the paint. We threw it out. This was done via an environmental science company, using xrf field testing. I have a certified report. So, tell me again about how this isn’t a big deal problem. Also remind me what the date limit of lead exposure is. Actually I’ll do that one for you, it’s easy, it’s 0. There is no safe exposure to lead. The fact that amazon could do something but is deliberately not is, well, expected. Sadly. Safe products isn’t in the mission statement of amazon. Finally: I worked at amazon for 5 years. Right before fba came online. It’s a cost cutting culture of frugalism. Spending money on product safety doesn’t have a place there.