ikeboy

88 ms·

901.
by ikeboy 7y ago
They just settled two weeks ago. See the last document filed.
902.
by ikeboy 7y ago
They implemented a mitigation for an issue that had this as a side effect. See https://blog.twitter.com/engineering/en_us/topics/insights/2... and the last time this came up at https://news.yc
903.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Yes. Amazon cares enough to push for higher criminal penalties for counterfeiters (see https://www.aboutamazon.com/our-company/our-positions )
904.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Product reviews are meant to be of the product, so it shouldn't matter which seller it is if you're all selling the same product.
905.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Why don't you put them on a tld that'll give you cheap domains?
906.
by ikeboy 7y ago
>Which public policy? Courts can and do rule based on what they perceive is in the public interest in the absence of any particular statute saying so. Imposing liability for complying with a court order seems unlikely to be considered in
907.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I'd think public policy prevents liability from complying with a valid court order in any event. In the counterfactual world where Apple made the software, I doubt there'd be any suits against Apple for it, and it likely wouldn&#x
908.
by ikeboy 7y ago
That was clumsily worded. I mean someone who a judge has decided there is probable cause that they committed a crime.
909.
by ikeboy 7y ago
>It does if you've told your customers that you can't. Not really. First of all, a suit is unlikely when the person who'd bring a lawsuit is someone that committed a crime with probable cause. Second, damages from having y
910.
by ikeboy 7y ago
>Complying with the data request would have given users who had their data obtained standing to sue Apple This is wrong. Complying with a court order doesn't open you up to any liability; furthermore, the users the FBI was after in
911.
by ikeboy 7y ago
webscraper.io is free and has more functionality. I've used it for a quick and easy way to scrape data off multiple pages. Probably has a slightly higher learning curve but once you get past that it's easy.
912.
by ikeboy 7y ago
What?
913.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Comparing an index (inflation) with individual parts of the index in order to claim that people are worse off is dumb. If you want to know if people are better off, look at real income. It's very clearly increasing over the last few de
914.
by ikeboy 7y ago
It's illegal in many contexts under federal law if the business is a "public accommodation". It's not unconstitutional. It may be against state laws in other contexts as well. Note the title here and at NPR originally sa
915.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Of course it's constitutional, Harvard is a private organization and basically none of the constitution applies to them. The question was whether it violates federal law - specifically Title VI. The confusing part is that Title VI proh
916.
Amazon sellers say online retail giant is trying to help itself, not consumers(washingtonpost.com)
9 points by ikeboy 7y ago|4 comments
917.
by ikeboy 7y ago
All of the comments there either agree with me or are talking about non-economic factors. E.g. the first one explicitly says it's not about economic harm. The second says they're taking producer surplus, which is correct if you in
918.
by ikeboy 7y ago
ePacket is more expensive than UPU rates.
919.
by ikeboy 7y ago
It's not magic, it's just that the USPS doesn't have to do the work of sorting them. Labor costs in China are much cheaper than in the US, it stands to reason their cost of sorting there will be less than what the USPS implic
920.
by ikeboy 7y ago
No, it's somewhere in between. They're not injecting at the local level, but they are sorting it (depending on the exact program).
921.
by ikeboy 7y ago
My comment was calling out the NPR for repeating an incorrect claim, yes. Yes, Chinese shippers pay different rates. NPR claimed to ship a mighty mug across the street for a US shipper would cost $6.30, when the actual cost would be about a
922.
by ikeboy 7y ago
>So, you didn't claim it as an option for the majority of shippers: which implies that you concede the main point you raised, that there are plenty of cases where shipping within the US is more expensive. No, it doesn't imply t
923.
by ikeboy 7y ago
If the envelope is the right size it absolutely does meet all the requirements. Put it in a bubble wrap envelope and it won't stick out. >And even if it did, once again, it would still be more expensive. You keep saying this, but so
924.
by ikeboy 7y ago
It's mentioned in the NPR article. Don't think I need to source the part that I agree with them on.
925.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I presented as an option for the specific item you presented as an example. I never claimed it's an option for the majority of shippers. It's an option for many of the cheap, light items people present as examples.
926.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Amazon charges sellers $3.28 in fulfilment fees for packages between 10 and 16 oz, which includes two day shipping to prime members. That's end to end, although you do need to pay to ship it to Amazon's warehouse, but that can be
927.
by ikeboy 7y ago
Where did I claim that? I'm claiming NPR is making/repeating a problematic comparison by using retail pricing for domestic shipping. International mail is aggregated by China post, and they pay the USPS for the last mile. To evalu
928.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I'm not claiming that China is using Parcel Select. I'm responding to the claim about local shipping in the NPR piece. They explicitly claim that the prices quoted are just for last mile delivery.
929.
by ikeboy 7y ago
I've shipped hundreds of thousands of flats, I'm quite familiar with the requirements. Looking at the product you linked it seems small enough that it could be stuffed into a flat envelope and shipped. >And even then you'r
930.
by ikeboy 7y ago
The ones under $1 aren't sent with ePacket, but under a different program that doesn't have tracking. Do any of the items fit in a regular envelope? Is it possible to ship for the price of a stamp? If not, most likely you can ship

More ›