6 ms·

A cynical reading: - The federal minimum wage in the U.S. is too low and should be raised (We'd like it if Walmart had higher labor costs) - Human-induced cl

A cynical reading: - The federal minimum wage in the U.S. is too low and should be raised (We'd like it if Walmart had higher labor costs) - Human-induced climate change is real, serious, and action is needed from the public and private sectors - The energy industry should have access to the same technologies as other industries (Yes, through lobbying and lies the oil companies are fucking over our planet. But we're going to keep them as customers. Somebody should do something, but not us.) - Diversity and inclusion are good for business—and more fundamentally—simply right - We strongly support the rights of immigrants and immigration reform (It'd be cool if there were more programmers for us to hire, more cheaply) The rights of LGBTQ+ people must be protected (We want to continue to employ LGBTQ+ people) - Governments at all levels—federal, state, and local—should have access to the best technology (Yeah, we're also going to keep providing services to ICE and China or whoever) - Governments should work quickly to put in place a regulatory framework for facial recognition technology (We recognize that someone should do something about this, but it's not going to be us) - Counterfeiters should receive stronger penalties under federal law (Nobody counterfeits Kindles or other Amazon brands on Amazon, but somehow the problem is impossible for us to solve for anyone else. Or we'd make less money, which is kind of the same thing when you think about it) - Consumer data privacy should be protected under federal law (Fuck facebook)

tzs 7y ago
> A cynical reading ... > The rights of LGBTQ+ people must be protected > > (We want to continue to employ LGBTQ+ people) Huh? The lack of some rights for LGB+ people under current law does not prevent Amazon from employing them. In fact, that lack of rights probably actually makes it easier for Amazon to employ them by easily extending benefits beyond what are required. Once those rights are legally granted, all employers will have to extend them, reducing Amazon's advantage. > Governments should work quickly to put in place a regulatory framework for facial recognition technology > > (We recognize that someone should do something about this, but it's not going to be us) They are doing something about it. It takes government to establish regulatory frameworks, so they are lobbying for that. > Counterfeiters should receive stronger penalties under federal law > > (Nobody counterfeits Kindles or other Amazon brands on Amazon, but somehow the problem is impossible for us to solve for anyone else. Or we'd make less money, which is kind of the same thing when you think about it) No one counterfeits Kindles on Amazon because no one but Amazon is allowed to sell Kindles on Amazon. The lack of Kindle counterfeits there gives no useful information about the difficulty of keeping counterfeits out of markets that allow multiple sellers for a given product.
- wheelie_boy 7y ago
  > No one counterfeits Kindles on Amazon because no one but Amazon is allowed to sell Kindles on Amazon. The lack of Kindle counterfeits there gives no useful information about the difficulty of keeping counterfeits out of markets that allow multiple sellers for a given product. That is the whole point. Amazon doesn't allow multiple sellers of Kindles or Amazon Basics power cords, but it did/does allow multiple sellers of, say, Birkenstocks or Popsockets or Magformers or Ripple Rug. That they don't allow multiple sellers of Kindles proves that this is not an unsolvable problem. For example: - If there is a single manufacturer of a brand-name product, Amazon could make it so that only that manufacturer can sell on Amazon, just like it does with its own products. - They could also make it more clear for commodity items which seller provided the item linked with a given review. Often different sellers sell entirely different goods under the same SKU, leading to wildly varying reviews. - They could probably do some other things too. I bet if you ask someone who's products are getting counterfeited on Amazon, they have a lot of ideas for what could be changed. > The lack of some rights for LGB+ people under current law does not prevent Amazon from employing them. In fact, that lack of rights probably actually makes it easier for Amazon to employ them by easily extending benefits beyond what are required. Once those rights are legally granted, all employers will have to extend them, reducing Amazon's advantage. Yeah, that's a good point. I was assuming that LBGTQ+ people were powerful enough now that they didn't have to stay at a company that didn't believe in their rights, and would leave Amazon for greener pastures if Amazon came out against their rights. > It takes government to establish regulatory frameworks Or, a massive cloud provider could establish a policy against certain uses of facial recognition technology on their own platform, tomorrow. A lot of the letter is of the form "We want someone else to put restrictions on everyone against doing bad stuff - in the meantime, we will continue to do that bad stuff, and/or continue to allow it on our platform"
  - gremlinsinc 7y ago
    > If there is a single manufacturer of a brand-name product, Amazon could make it so that only that manufacturer can sell on Amazon, just like it does with its own products. -- Or they could at least have a moderated platform where those merchandisers could 'greenlight' distributors of their own products so if they do have 3rd party sellers/distributors they could show who is valid and who is not.

tzs 7y ago

> A cynical reading ... > The rights of LGBTQ+ people must be protected > > (We want to continue to employ LGBTQ+ people) Huh? The lack of some rights for LGB+ people under current law does not prevent Amazon from employing them. In fact, that lack of rights probably actually makes it easier for Amazon to employ them by easily extending benefits beyond what are required. Once those rights are legally granted, all employers will have to extend them, reducing Amazon's advantage. > Governments should work quickly to put in place a regulatory framework for facial recognition technology > > (We recognize that someone should do something about this, but it's not going to be us) They are doing something about it. It takes government to establish regulatory frameworks, so they are lobbying for that. > Counterfeiters should receive stronger penalties under federal law > > (Nobody counterfeits Kindles or other Amazon brands on Amazon, but somehow the problem is impossible for us to solve for anyone else. Or we'd make less money, which is kind of the same thing when you think about it) No one counterfeits Kindles on Amazon because no one but Amazon is allowed to sell Kindles on Amazon. The lack of Kindle counterfeits there gives no useful information about the difficulty of keeping counterfeits out of markets that allow multiple sellers for a given product.

wheelie_boy 7y ago
> No one counterfeits Kindles on Amazon because no one but Amazon is allowed to sell Kindles on Amazon. The lack of Kindle counterfeits there gives no useful information about the difficulty of keeping counterfeits out of markets that allow multiple sellers for a given product. That is the whole point. Amazon doesn't allow multiple sellers of Kindles or Amazon Basics power cords, but it did/does allow multiple sellers of, say, Birkenstocks or Popsockets or Magformers or Ripple Rug. That they don't allow multiple sellers of Kindles proves that this is not an unsolvable problem. For example: - If there is a single manufacturer of a brand-name product, Amazon could make it so that only that manufacturer can sell on Amazon, just like it does with its own products. - They could also make it more clear for commodity items which seller provided the item linked with a given review. Often different sellers sell entirely different goods under the same SKU, leading to wildly varying reviews. - They could probably do some other things too. I bet if you ask someone who's products are getting counterfeited on Amazon, they have a lot of ideas for what could be changed. > The lack of some rights for LGB+ people under current law does not prevent Amazon from employing them. In fact, that lack of rights probably actually makes it easier for Amazon to employ them by easily extending benefits beyond what are required. Once those rights are legally granted, all employers will have to extend them, reducing Amazon's advantage. Yeah, that's a good point. I was assuming that LBGTQ+ people were powerful enough now that they didn't have to stay at a company that didn't believe in their rights, and would leave Amazon for greener pastures if Amazon came out against their rights. > It takes government to establish regulatory frameworks Or, a massive cloud provider could establish a policy against certain uses of facial recognition technology on their own platform, tomorrow. A lot of the letter is of the form "We want someone else to put restrictions on everyone against doing bad stuff - in the meantime, we will continue to do that bad stuff, and/or continue to allow it on our platform"
- gremlinsinc 7y ago
  > If there is a single manufacturer of a brand-name product, Amazon could make it so that only that manufacturer can sell on Amazon, just like it does with its own products. -- Or they could at least have a moderated platform where those merchandisers could 'greenlight' distributors of their own products so if they do have 3rd party sellers/distributors they could show who is valid and who is not.