4 ms·

> But evidently, by the way people talk about ordering everything from Amazon (despite its numerous problems) and look at you like you have three heads if you t

by zepto 6y ago

> But evidently, by the way people talk about ordering everything from Amazon (despite its numerous problems) and look at you like you have three heads if you talk about going to even say just Target.com, there seems to be some counterintuitive hurdle for switching websites that's actually worse than for physical stores. I think there is truth to this since I personally for a long time would go to Amazon for everything. Over time I have shifted to using them less and less. However I think it’s just a matter of consumer maturity. Apple Pay has done a lot to make it easier for me to buy from 3rd party websites. There is a lot of money to be made in services to help the rest of the web be more competitive to Amazon. We are just at a certain stage in the cycle. That’s what concerns me about getting the government involved. These ‘monopolies’ have arisen very quickly - on the order of a decade. Things can change in the marketplace just as fast.

mindslight 6y ago
We can look at general principles and see problematic couplings and incentives. In fact we could do this ten years ago before the problem grew so large, but there was no political will. For example, by bundling product sales and web UI, what Amazon (et al) are doing is making it so that customers have to use Amazon's software to shop Amazon (and conversely they're prevented from using software of their own choice). Of course Amazon's software hasn't been designed to benefit the user, but has been designed to benefit Amazon - eg "dark patterns". Hence my call to unbundle the two by mandating API access. A public API is straightforwardly in Amazon's capabilities (it's literally just making a version of their website in a predictable format without all the extra crap), and would tie right into your "services to help the rest of the web be more competitive to Amazon". Facebook et al are doing the same thing with regards to Metcalfe's law, and a similar remedy would be appropriate. Not that I think any specific legislation will be anything resembling sensible reforms. Hell, we'll be lucky if it doesn't end up being a boon for big tech.
- zepto 6y ago
  > Amazon (et al) are doing is making it so that customers have to use Amazon's software to shop Amazon This is true of almost all online stores and nobody is proposing legislation against it, so it’s not at all clear what you are saying. Government mandating APIs seems like a fatally destructive move against software freedom forever.
  - mindslight 6y ago
    I'm proposing it and saying it would be a better remedy than whatever regulatory-capture-ripe "reform" they're proposing is. I actually like house brands of stuff, when compared to the thousands of gensym brands. The problem isn't marketplace companies privileging their own brands - it's with singular companies owning the marketplace to begin with. Humans are creatures of habit, and the way to make it so we aren't in the habit of just buying everything from $Amazon is to replace that with the habit of buying things through non-affiliated aggregators. I'd rather have one familiar UI showing me (Amazon Basics, Zoro Select, HDX, etc), than multiple UIs each showing me the same "competing" gensym brands.
    - zepto 6y ago
      Why not just outlaw dark patterns in general as deceptive practices? All this focus on fixing particular companies or government mandating software architecture seems like it just gets the government more and more invovled while not doing anything to prevent the actual abuses.
      - mindslight 6y ago
        It's impossible to formally define dark patterns, especially when trying to except traditional dark patterns (recurring sales, coupons, strategically placed roasting chickens, etc). And so any attempt to do that will necessarily "get the government more and more involved". Either through some administrative body that decides whether a certain thing is a "dark pattern", or through judicial remedies ("Here is your 57 cent media credit because Amazon lied about shipping cutoff times. They admit no wrongdoing but promise to never do it again"). Meanwhile mandating APIs isn't mandating "software architecture". It's merely just a different form of the website that has a predictable structure. Amazon could even choose whatever structure they want, as long as it is documented and versioned. Both approaches aren't mutually exclusive, so I'm not arguing against the former. I just don't hold out hope for it to create meaningful reform - centralized bodies are just as likely to bless abusive practices.
        6y ago

by zepto 6y ago

mindslight 6y ago

We can look at general principles and see problematic couplings and incentives. In fact we could do this ten years ago before the problem grew so large, but there was no political will. For example, by bundling product sales and web UI, what Amazon (et al) are doing is making it so that customers have to use Amazon's software to shop Amazon (and conversely they're prevented from using software of their own choice). Of course Amazon's software hasn't been designed to benefit the user, but has been designed to benefit Amazon - eg "dark patterns". Hence my call to unbundle the two by mandating API access. A public API is straightforwardly in Amazon's capabilities (it's literally just making a version of their website in a predictable format without all the extra crap), and would tie right into your "services to help the rest of the web be more competitive to Amazon". Facebook et al are doing the same thing with regards to Metcalfe's law, and a similar remedy would be appropriate. Not that I think any specific legislation will be anything resembling sensible reforms. Hell, we'll be lucky if it doesn't end up being a boon for big tech.

zepto 6y ago
> Amazon (et al) are doing is making it so that customers have to use Amazon's software to shop Amazon This is true of almost all online stores and nobody is proposing legislation against it, so it’s not at all clear what you are saying. Government mandating APIs seems like a fatally destructive move against software freedom forever.
- mindslight 6y ago
  I'm proposing it and saying it would be a better remedy than whatever regulatory-capture-ripe "reform" they're proposing is. I actually like house brands of stuff, when compared to the thousands of gensym brands. The problem isn't marketplace companies privileging their own brands - it's with singular companies owning the marketplace to begin with. Humans are creatures of habit, and the way to make it so we aren't in the habit of just buying everything from $Amazon is to replace that with the habit of buying things through non-affiliated aggregators. I'd rather have one familiar UI showing me (Amazon Basics, Zoro Select, HDX, etc), than multiple UIs each showing me the same "competing" gensym brands.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Why not just outlaw dark patterns in general as deceptive practices? All this focus on fixing particular companies or government mandating software architecture seems like it just gets the government more and more invovled while not doing anything to prevent the actual abuses.
    - mindslight 6y ago
      It's impossible to formally define dark patterns, especially when trying to except traditional dark patterns (recurring sales, coupons, strategically placed roasting chickens, etc). And so any attempt to do that will necessarily "get the government more and more involved". Either through some administrative body that decides whether a certain thing is a "dark pattern", or through judicial remedies ("Here is your 57 cent media credit because Amazon lied about shipping cutoff times. They admit no wrongdoing but promise to never do it again"). Meanwhile mandating APIs isn't mandating "software architecture". It's merely just a different form of the website that has a predictable structure. Amazon could even choose whatever structure they want, as long as it is documented and versioned. Both approaches aren't mutually exclusive, so I'm not arguing against the former. I just don't hold out hope for it to create meaningful reform - centralized bodies are just as likely to bless abusive practices.
      - 6y ago