7 ms·
Amazon wants a product safety regulator declared unconstitutional
- voytec 2y agoPotential bias warning: The Washington Post is owned by Bezos.
- danorama 2y agohttps://apnews.com/article/amazon-sues-cpsc-product-recalls-cbc117a5cc2c322bded2b3b93736121e https://apnews.com/article/amazon-sues-cpsc-product-recalls-...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jeroenhd 2y agoMoreover, Bezos actively interferes with publications he dislikes. This isn't just an "investment company led by billionaires happens to own newspaper to extract profits" situation, the WP has become completely unreliable due to Bezos' meddling.
- jfengel 2y agoThe news division of the Post is still more or less reputable. Their worst failings are by omission, what they choose not to cover. It's much like the Wall Street Journal, which is a highly regarded source of information packaged with an editorial page that reads like 4chan.
- danorama 2y agohttps://archive.ph/OXrib https://archive.ph/OXrib
- xigency 2y agoAmazing. As in, amazingly and horrifically awful behavior.
- Retric 2y agoThat’s an interesting indirect statement that Amazon believes they are effective protection for consumer safety. I’ve never heard of them, but I guess they are doing good work.
- jajko 2y agoAlmost as if the company is run by sociopaths for whose empathy is a foreign, malign concept. Money and power is the only goal worthy spending energy on, greed is good. Bezos is well known for at least some of that. Damn, we all knew that modern free egalitarian society stands on rather weak legs, 7 days to the wolves and all, but to see it happening in real time is quite something. Like traveling and overall security before 9/11 and after. I'll tell my kids about these times, in Switzerland we are pretty well shielded from current US madness but no shield is strong enough, US became simply too central, about time to shift balance. I realize bipolar orange man is probably trying to keep the balance in favor of US in upcoming future, but that elephant in porcelain shop approach is just speeding up things against what US should want for itself as a global player. But what do I know, maybe fascist oligarchy dictatorship is a good way for US long term.
- aaronbrethorst 2y agoI can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, but a fascist oligarchy dictatorship isn’t good for anyone.
- jwiz 2y agoUsually when people use the phrase, "But what do I know?", it's to flag that they think they probably do know.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- javcasas 2y agoThey usually know, but they also know that their opposing party is willing to use bad faith tactics or outright violence to defend their position, and they are scared to some level.
- dragonwriter 2y agoIt is good for the dictator and oligarchs, while it lasts.
- ck2 2y agoAmazon needs to breakup its own sales vs warehouse/shipping business if it wants to be able to do things like that. Otherwise it can do sly things like sell things to itself for distribution and then not be responsible. Is "Amazon Resale" then not responsible for recalls? One thing about Walmart, if there's a recall for an item they sold, you just bring it back to their customer service desk and they do a full refund. There was a DVD player I had bought a decade earlier that was apparently bursting into flames for some people so recalled, I just brought it back there used and worn out and full refund. Of course if Amazon wins this, well Walmart is going to also stop doing it.
- autobodie 2y ago> Amazon needs to breakup its own sales vs warehouse/shipping business if it wants to be able to do things like that. According to the fundamental dictates of capitalism, you have this backwards.
- gruez 2y ago>According to the fundamental dictates of capitalism [...] And what's that? vertical integration? that's hardly a "fundamental dictate". A few decades ago vertically integrated conglomerates (think GE) were going the way of the dodo, with "core competency" being the new MBA buzzword.
- autobodie 2y agoLarger companies with more profit have more political influence. This is fundamental. The fads you describe are just that. Tides of destruction are inevitable, but the fundamentals remain true. You're missing the forest for the trees.
- Supermancho 2y ago> This is fundamental This is fundamental to a frame you made up. Then you wax on with more nonsense about a nihilistic "Tides of destruction are inevitable". This stance is not insightful or constructive. Figuratively throwing your hands up and walking away because the sun eventually goes out, is a personal choice. Plenty of economies lasted a lot longer than the US one or continue on after crises. You're missing the trees for the forest of regular commerce that all people navigate and benefit from, including you.
- throwaway8iep 2y ago[flagged]
- pavel_lishin 2y agoWhy?
- ajb 2y agoBecause Bezos owns the post
- croes 2y ago> The company argues that it merely ships these goods for others — similar to UPS and FedEx — and should not be required to cooperate with the CPSC on recalls if those products are found to be unsafe. So these other companies only pay Amazon for the shipping and nothing else, do they?
- gruez 2y agoshould ebay and facebook marketplace be responsible for cooperating with CPSC on recalls?
- klausa 2y agoYes.
- ndegruchy 2y agoIf they are able to reach out to folks who have purchased on their platforms and mark offending items as recalled due to safety issues, I don't see why not. It doesn't even seem like that onerous of a task. They're not _responsible_ for the items sold, but they should be doing _some_ level of footwork making sure that items that are recalled are labeled and/or delisted. Just like Target, Walmart and other physical retailers often work with recalls on products sold through their stores.
- Aurornis 2y ago> I don't see why not. It doesn't even seem like that onerous of a task It’s a hugely onerous task because it requires mapping every listing to a known product. If someone sells a “green couch” then how do you track recalls for that? You either force everyone selling anything to look it up in a big database you maintain and disallow generic sales, or everyone is just going to list things generically anyway to avoid the hassle. It’s an idea that sounds easy when you assume everyone’s making perfectly formed listing, but sounds like a waste of time when you look at real listings. EDIT: Replaced high chair example with a couch because people were pointing out that a high chair listing would be deleted. Though that proves my point, that any item covered by regulations wouldn’t be allowed on the platform, so if you extend regulations to cover every product ever made then you can forget about being able to buy things second hand. I’m guessing Amazon would actually love that, but you wouldn’t.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Angostura 2y agoA serious body, doing serious work, but with a frequently hilarious social media account https://bsky.app/profile/cpsc.gov https://bsky.app/profile/cpsc.gov
- photonthug 2y agoA very short scroll indeed to find Amazon in the crosshairs, and for good reason too. Baby stuff is always overpriced poor-quality garbage, but if you've been saying to yourself "Gee I wish it was also a suffocation hazard" then Amazon wants you to know they are here to help by a concerted effort to deregulate anything and everything.
- brendoelfrendo 2y agoCPSC is a great follow: came for the gonzo photoshop collages, stayed for the relevant product safety info. Every time I see them post I have a little hope for our government.
- tw04 2y agoDon’t worry, Elon is trying to kill that too. https://populistpolicy.org/doge-analysis-of-the-consumer-product-safety-commission/ https://populistpolicy.org/doge-analysis-of-the-consumer-pro...
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago> The CPSC’s budget of $140 million annually supports oversight of thousands of products. Critics argue that many safety inspections could be handled by private organizations or manufacturers under government oversight. Genuinely curious: if “under government oversight” is an acceptable option for critics, what is the CPSC currently doing that is disagreeable?
- tw04 2y agoAnd recent history shows how well private inspections with government oversight works too. Boeing has proven it’s a superior model and private companies would never try to game the system.
- ChuckMcM 2y agoIt's interesting that Congress is talking about sunsetting section 230 which provides protection for web sites that display user generated content from being responsible for what that content says, and what Amazon wants here is apparently the equivalent for drop-ship/forwarding sales companies and the products those companies ship through them. But the argument is that safety agencies are unconstitutional? For me, this suggests a high level of dysfunction in the Government if people asking for things from the Government do so using the biases of the people in power as the basis for their argument rather than reasoning to it by some set of principles. I don't know how much of this article was inferred by the person writing it and how much accurately reflects Amazon's position, so I can't draw strong conclusions from it but it's an interesting reflection on the extreme 'buyer beware' attitude of cut throat businesses that take no responsibility for the harms they inflict on their own customers.
- jfengel 2y agoThat just kinda follows from democracy. Principles are for voters. Elected officials do what they think the voters want (as affirmed by getting re-elected). If they went back to first principles, and disagreed with their constituents, they'd lose. The closest thing you get to principles are civil servants, who are hired for their domain expertise. But voters grumble because those civil servants aren't elected; they are basically self propagating by hiring their successors. That actually used to kinda work. There was enough inertia to keep elections from making everything about people's moods, and enough input from Congress, SCOTUS, and POTUS to keep it competent. But the mood has shifted to extreme distrust of those institutions. So they're getting wiped out in one fell swoop. There is a principle in place, but it's the principle that the government itself is irreparable.
- spiderfarmer 2y agoEven if you’re deluded to the point where you’re convinced government can’t work, what is your end game? People who can only criticize never offer solutions, but are always happy to profit from the work of others. Like Ayn Rand who was dependent on social security handouts. Even if you drive over roads that were built because of government programs, you’re a hypocritical profiteer in my book.
- wnevets 2y agoWe're well beyond the point of these massive tech companies needing to be broken up.
- sandworm101 2y agoThis sort of cutthroat litigation is getting too much. Once upon a time corprations actually did stuff when told by government. If a product or service was declared dangerous, it stopped. If a regulator said every room needed a fire extinguisher, the company bought fire extinguishers. Now, every little thing becomes a case for the supreme court, often literally. Insist that safety signs be in spanish? Thats heading to scotus as a profound constitutional crisis at the root of democracy, "Stop selling bombs" ... well that impacts state's rights to regulate non-lethal weapons. Im all for testing constitutionality, but this isnt about that. This is about delaying each and every tiny reg because doing so saves a buck on next week's earnings report. I dont like seeing constitutional issues used as a cover for blatant penny pinching. Amazon sells stuff. Like every other "person" selling stuff they have an obligation not to sell dangerous stuff. It isnt right that they can ignore every warning as they wait out 10+ years of litigation. How about this: Dont think this is constitutional? How about every profit derived from the sale of anything dangerous be put in escrow until the litigation is over? Many states do this with traffic tickets.
- saidinesh5 2y agoIf any Amazon employee involved in this is here, I'd love to hear their take on if/how this conflicts with their leadership principles: https://www.amazon.jobs/content/en/our-workplace/leadership-principles https://www.amazon.jobs/content/en/our-workplace/leadership-... Whenever i interviewed there, i felt they actually abide by these and somehow this move seems to contradict their top one: Customer Obsession.
- barbazoo 2y ago> Leaders start with the customer and work backwards. They work vigorously to earn and keep customer trust. Although leaders pay attention to competitors, they obsess over customers. I don’t see a contradiction at all. Their customers want to consume cheap products and get those products instantly if possible. If removing regulation lets them sell those products cheaper, ship them faster, that’s pretty aligned with the leadership principle it seems. Customer will continue to “trust” Amazon because that trust isn’t that the product will be good. It’ll just be that Amazon will take it back and dispose it for them and send them something different.
- spiderfarmer 2y ago[flagged]
- b112 2y agoThis isn't reddit or slashdot, and turning everything into a post about the politics or the other team isn't helpful. Amazon has been on a constantly downward path for a decade. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.
- leosanchez 2y ago> This isn't reddit or slashdot Or Twitter
- robotnikman 2y ago
- casenmgreen 2y agoBezos looking for some payback for WAPO?
- pfdietz 2y agoI'm already at the point where I don't trust anything Amazon is selling.
- vaidhy 2y agoMy team built automation for the product recalls in 2011. The process roughly was: 1. Pull the listing off. 2. Inform warehouses to pull the product off the shelves and move them to a separate area. 3. Try and get shipments stopped. 4. Notify all those who bought the product about the recall. None of these were a technical challenge. One of my favorite business managers managed this and she would scan reviews for potential dangerous products even if CPSC has not issued any recalls. The real problem is why do you do with the recalled products. If it is expensive enough, the seller will take it back. With the flood of really cheap goods, they need to be destroyed and it is expensive. A lot of overseas sellers will just ghost Amazon since the cost of recall might be larger than their profits from that account. The
- octacat 2y agoIf it is not a store, just don't buy from them, problem solved.