5 ms·

Title of the original video: "Amazon accuses customer of racism & shuts down their smart home" So there is 1. surveillance/control techno-fascism 2. US-centr

by p-e-w 3y ago

Title of the original video: "Amazon accuses customer of racism & shuts down their smart home" So there is 1. surveillance/control techno-fascism 2. US-centric political zeitgeist 3. useless cloud garbage all rolled into one. This is without a doubt the most contemporary story I've seen in a while.

ChoHag 3y ago
Don't forget 4: Bold assertions that this couldn't possibly happen in our corporate 'topia followed by silence after the non-apology by the company that did it.
bsder 3y ago
It's also unusual because this is Amazon instead of Google. Amazon is suddenly going to suspend someone because a random employee made a report?! With neither verification nor advance notice? Excuse me? That seems like it could very well stand under racketeering laws--"Nice delivery service you got there--shame if something were to happen to it." I hope there is an ambulance chaser salivating over this.
- Nasrudith 3y ago
  It is never RICO damn it!
no_butterscotch 3y ago
Wow when I saw the title I thought "is this related to the case from earlier" and it appears to be one and the same. I can't believe anyone would buy an Amazon product after this, it's crazy! Can your other IOT things be shut off? Can your AWS account be disabled?
- gryn 3y ago
  the answer to all of those are yes. it's the reason why you should not put all your eggs in on basket. especially the case for google. ex, with their anti adblock movement in youtube, there's a small chance you might find yourself locked from your emails, GCP, Drive and every other service if they decide to be more aggressive about it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36747367 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36747367
- _a_a_a_ 3y ago
  Yep same case. He's not a quick learner, is he.
  - harry8 3y ago
    Same reaction, only I thought of Amazon not learning. Gotta be a non-zero chance this person is loving going back to the publicity well. But yeah all of it is speculation really, right? There's no facts here you'd bet large sums on being as described - yet it's entirely possible some are too. Who knows? And that's why we have laws and courts to deal with bad behavior.
- bryanrasmussen 3y ago
  although it is unethical for Amazon to do this etc. and obviously I am the last person to argue for people needing to be smart about things but probably it would make sense not to have business services associated with personal services, also for tax purposes etc.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  I can't believe anyone would buy cloud encumbered IoT or many of the things people do today in modern society where they pick convenience and/or instant gratification over all else Amazon and other Tech companies are Huge because they provide people what they desire instantly with no friction. Why setup a HA instance and learn to manage things yourself when you can just outsource it
  - duped 3y ago
    You can't believe people buy the cheaper options both in price and time investment?
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      I believe it, because I see it. I don't understand people trading freedom for saving a few bucks, though. It seems the height of idiocy to me.
      - duped 3y ago
        It's because most people don't consider it to be "trading freedom." If the thing breaks you replace it. But people actually do want the kinds of features enabled by IoT devices on top of cloud infrastructure and they're reasonably priced. It's not idiocy, it's utility. And you're free not to buy into it. It's no skin off your back.
        JohnFen 3y ago
        I consider it idiocy because you can have the same utility without putting control of your home into someone else's hands. > And you're free not to buy into it. It's no skin off your back. Of course. It's absolutely no skin off my back. I'm just expressing that I don't understand why people choose to do this. It's also true that I don't need to understand! But I am curious.
boredumb 3y ago
but he said a forbidden word!
- RecycledEle 3y ago
  No. He did not say a forbidden word. The delivery driver claimed he said a forbidden word. The video evidence showed they delivery driver did not correctly retell what happened. The thing that bugs me is that there is no penalty for the delivery driver.
  - boredumb 3y ago
    I should have added a sarcasm tag. The thing that bugs me is that you could say a word other people don't like hearing on their own porch and be locked out of their home.
HWR_14 3y ago
The whole situation here seems bad because people being cut off from their existing prepurchased smart devices is bad (and going to happen when servers get shut down). Can we separate that from the entirely correct action from Amazon of "if you are going to insult our deliverypeople with racist language, we no longer will send them to your house". Leaving aside any moral judgements of doing business at all with such a person, Amazon would probably face some legal liability for constantly asking their employees to put up with that. Also, while the US certainly has racism, I don't think it's fair to call that "US-centric". A lot of countries have a lot of racists.
- bryanrasmussen 3y ago
  >Can we separate that from the entirely correct action from Amazon of "if you are going to insult our deliverypeople with racist language, we no longer will send them to your house". What!?!? The description of the incident says " Amazon completely shut down the customer's account, locking him out of his smart home devices." How is that "we will no longer send them to your house"? If in order to not send a delivery person to a customer's house Amazon needs to shut down the customer's account it would seem that the one having difficulty separating these things that should be separate is Amazon and not anyone else?
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  No we can not, mainly because there was no due process on that at all. No Corroboration, no investigation before taking action. One driver, made one accusation, and bam instant termination of the account. I can not support that as being the "correct action". Far too much room for abuse in such a system in this case the person had to submit evidence of their innocence to amazon by way of other Camera's. what if no evidence had existed to refute the drivers claim? I will never a support a "Guilty until proven innocent" standard for anything
  - igetspam 3y ago
    Due process does not apply to corporations and the supreme Court has made it very clear that anyone can discriminate against anyone they want, for any reason, real or imagined and opt to not do business with them. Amazon doesn't need to deliver things to you if they think you're a jerk. > in this case the person had to submit evidence of their innocence to amazon by way of other Camera's. what if no evidence had existed to refute the drivers claim? Amazon is not a right. If they couldn't prove it wasn't true, Amazon doesn't owe them anything except possibly a refund on the smart devices (I could see that).
AlexandrB 3y ago
It's absurd that in 2023 the operation of your home appliances depends on your relationship with your mailman. Large tech companies like Amazon have their fingers in way too many pies. It may not technically be a monopoly, but it seems very detrimental to consumers.
- rad_gruchalski 3y ago
  You don't have to buy it, nor use it. There are other providers. Or you can roll your own.
  - lacrimacida 3y ago
    That doesn’t excuse Amazon’s behavior though
    - rad_gruchalski 3y ago
      I haven't said it does. Frankly, that's my main gripe with all the XaaS. You're always risking that the service provider switched you off. That's my main fear with all these autonomous car businesses. Anyway... But the consumer has the choice. These cloud providers should be regulated like utilities.
      - noobermin 3y ago
        >But the consumer has the choice. Until they don't. Often times it gets harder and harder to be a luddite or near one.
  - trinsic2 3y ago
    And if non-smart devices get completely replaced with smart appliances, we"re screwed.
    - Hackbraten 3y ago
      There will always be smart devices that operate 100% on-prem.
boredumb 3y ago
At what point is this malicious? What is the actual consumer use case for this being built - a word that is deemed offensive by the amazon product people magically bricks you out of your own home?
- bacchusracine 3y ago
  >>At what point is this malicious? I don't know about you but to me that point was reached and exceeded when it became clear the person making the claim was wearing ear pods and couldn't even claim an unobstructed listening experience to the event they complained about...

by p-e-w 3y ago

ChoHag 3y ago

Don't forget 4: Bold assertions that this couldn't possibly happen in our corporate 'topia followed by silence after the non-apology by the company that did it.

bsder 3y ago

It's also unusual because this is Amazon instead of Google. Amazon is suddenly going to suspend someone because a random employee made a report?! With neither verification nor advance notice? Excuse me? That seems like it could very well stand under racketeering laws--"Nice delivery service you got there--shame if something were to happen to it." I hope there is an ambulance chaser salivating over this.

Nasrudith 3y ago
It is never RICO damn it!

no_butterscotch 3y ago

Wow when I saw the title I thought "is this related to the case from earlier" and it appears to be one and the same. I can't believe anyone would buy an Amazon product after this, it's crazy! Can your other IOT things be shut off? Can your AWS account be disabled?

gryn 3y ago
the answer to all of those are yes. it's the reason why you should not put all your eggs in on basket. especially the case for google. ex, with their anti adblock movement in youtube, there's a small chance you might find yourself locked from your emails, GCP, Drive and every other service if they decide to be more aggressive about it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36747367 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36747367
_a_a_a_ 3y ago
Yep same case. He's not a quick learner, is he.
- harry8 3y ago
  Same reaction, only I thought of Amazon not learning. Gotta be a non-zero chance this person is loving going back to the publicity well. But yeah all of it is speculation really, right? There's no facts here you'd bet large sums on being as described - yet it's entirely possible some are too. Who knows? And that's why we have laws and courts to deal with bad behavior.
bryanrasmussen 3y ago
although it is unethical for Amazon to do this etc. and obviously I am the last person to argue for people needing to be smart about things but probably it would make sense not to have business services associated with personal services, also for tax purposes etc.
phpisthebest 3y ago
I can't believe anyone would buy cloud encumbered IoT or many of the things people do today in modern society where they pick convenience and/or instant gratification over all else Amazon and other Tech companies are Huge because they provide people what they desire instantly with no friction. Why setup a HA instance and learn to manage things yourself when you can just outsource it
- duped 3y ago
  You can't believe people buy the cheaper options both in price and time investment?
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    I believe it, because I see it. I don't understand people trading freedom for saving a few bucks, though. It seems the height of idiocy to me.
    - duped 3y ago
      It's because most people don't consider it to be "trading freedom." If the thing breaks you replace it. But people actually do want the kinds of features enabled by IoT devices on top of cloud infrastructure and they're reasonably priced. It's not idiocy, it's utility. And you're free not to buy into it. It's no skin off your back.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        I consider it idiocy because you can have the same utility without putting control of your home into someone else's hands. > And you're free not to buy into it. It's no skin off your back. Of course. It's absolutely no skin off my back. I'm just expressing that I don't understand why people choose to do this. It's also true that I don't need to understand! But I am curious.

boredumb 3y ago

but he said a forbidden word!

RecycledEle 3y ago
No. He did not say a forbidden word. The delivery driver claimed he said a forbidden word. The video evidence showed they delivery driver did not correctly retell what happened. The thing that bugs me is that there is no penalty for the delivery driver.
- boredumb 3y ago
  I should have added a sarcasm tag. The thing that bugs me is that you could say a word other people don't like hearing on their own porch and be locked out of their home.

HWR_14 3y ago

The whole situation here seems bad because people being cut off from their existing prepurchased smart devices is bad (and going to happen when servers get shut down). Can we separate that from the entirely correct action from Amazon of "if you are going to insult our deliverypeople with racist language, we no longer will send them to your house". Leaving aside any moral judgements of doing business at all with such a person, Amazon would probably face some legal liability for constantly asking their employees to put up with that. Also, while the US certainly has racism, I don't think it's fair to call that "US-centric". A lot of countries have a lot of racists.

bryanrasmussen 3y ago
>Can we separate that from the entirely correct action from Amazon of "if you are going to insult our deliverypeople with racist language, we no longer will send them to your house". What!?!? The description of the incident says " Amazon completely shut down the customer's account, locking him out of his smart home devices." How is that "we will no longer send them to your house"? If in order to not send a delivery person to a customer's house Amazon needs to shut down the customer's account it would seem that the one having difficulty separating these things that should be separate is Amazon and not anyone else?
phpisthebest 3y ago
No we can not, mainly because there was no due process on that at all. No Corroboration, no investigation before taking action. One driver, made one accusation, and bam instant termination of the account. I can not support that as being the "correct action". Far too much room for abuse in such a system in this case the person had to submit evidence of their innocence to amazon by way of other Camera's. what if no evidence had existed to refute the drivers claim? I will never a support a "Guilty until proven innocent" standard for anything
- igetspam 3y ago
  Due process does not apply to corporations and the supreme Court has made it very clear that anyone can discriminate against anyone they want, for any reason, real or imagined and opt to not do business with them. Amazon doesn't need to deliver things to you if they think you're a jerk. > in this case the person had to submit evidence of their innocence to amazon by way of other Camera's. what if no evidence had existed to refute the drivers claim? Amazon is not a right. If they couldn't prove it wasn't true, Amazon doesn't owe them anything except possibly a refund on the smart devices (I could see that).

AlexandrB 3y ago

It's absurd that in 2023 the operation of your home appliances depends on your relationship with your mailman. Large tech companies like Amazon have their fingers in way too many pies. It may not technically be a monopoly, but it seems very detrimental to consumers.

rad_gruchalski 3y ago
You don't have to buy it, nor use it. There are other providers. Or you can roll your own.
- lacrimacida 3y ago
  That doesn’t excuse Amazon’s behavior though
  - rad_gruchalski 3y ago
    I haven't said it does. Frankly, that's my main gripe with all the XaaS. You're always risking that the service provider switched you off. That's my main fear with all these autonomous car businesses. Anyway... But the consumer has the choice. These cloud providers should be regulated like utilities.
    - noobermin 3y ago
      >But the consumer has the choice. Until they don't. Often times it gets harder and harder to be a luddite or near one.
- trinsic2 3y ago
  And if non-smart devices get completely replaced with smart appliances, we"re screwed.
  - Hackbraten 3y ago
    There will always be smart devices that operate 100% on-prem.

boredumb 3y ago

At what point is this malicious? What is the actual consumer use case for this being built - a word that is deemed offensive by the amazon product people magically bricks you out of your own home?

bacchusracine 3y ago
>>At what point is this malicious? I don't know about you but to me that point was reached and exceeded when it became clear the person making the claim was wearing ear pods and couldn't even claim an unobstructed listening experience to the event they complained about...