Most of these are problems with any large company, not Amazon per se.
Yes, companies want to kill competition by any means and do all sorts of bad-for-the-consumer and bad-for-workers things. We didn't just wake up yesterday into the industrial era. That's all of capitalism. Amazon isn't special, just high-profile.
> if you rent a server from Amazon, you have no rights.
Amazon isn't in the business of granting rights.
If you don't like any of the things included in Stallman's list, don't expect change to come from Amazon or some boycott thereof. The change should come from us by way of better governance.
I feel like Stallman missed a good time to make a positive point on why we need better governance and perhaps regulation to reign in the much uglier parts of corporations/capitalism/behavior that we might as a society not like. He could have been inspiring and spoken to a much wider audience than the paranoia crowd.
Instead he wanted to make a negative piece about Amazon. It made the top of HN, where we'll talk aboutit for 15 hours, and then nobody else will listen.
More generally I think its safe to say that people will not listen to a boycott that inconveniences them. They might listen to a positive message on the reasons we should support and enact laws upholding digital freedoms, worker rights, and things to stop anti-competitive practices.
There are a lot of digital freedom causes worth championing, but I'm always disappointed by Stallman. It's easy to hate. We need more positive people that can frame causes like this more effectively.
"If you rent a server from Amazon, you have no rights" is a silly statement. It is a privilege to do business with Amazon and either party has the ability to severe that. You do not have a right to use a server that Amazon provides.
Rights are not granted by anything. They describe the extent of government power. That is all.
> Most of these are problems with any large company, not Amazon per se.
Agreed! We won't get Amazon or any of these large corporations to change by boycotting their services (w/ no success). Instead we need to push for tech savy people to make it high up in Washington and European Union so that they protect customer interests instead of granting corporations all the power.
The change should come from us by way of better governance.
If this more an issue of the "lazy masses"? I don't believe for a second that a well organized boycott would not get Amazon's attention and action on a given issue. The problem is that a boycott is much harder to implement than getting someone to vote on issue X.
> don't expect change to come from Amazon or some boycott thereof. The change should come from us by way of better governance.
Devil's advocate: Rights are inherent, and an external authority (government, etc.) cannot by definition grant them; it can only restrict them (though whether it should is separate).
It's a subtle point, but I bring this up because it's more in line with the way Stallman thinks, so to miss that point (for any other readers) is to misunderstand Stallman.
And "wrong" means "so evil they should be boycotted utterly"?
There are many things I don't like about how Amazon deals with ebooks, but there are many things that are good about it as well, and I prefer to not let perfect be the enemy of good.
The split personality in the HN community is interesting.
On one hand, you have things like "never let the perfect be the enemy of the good; better to have a product that works than to get everything right".
On the other, you have things like "Amazon puts DRM on their ebooks and terminated Wikileaks. Boycott everything they do."
Amazon is innovative enough and has benefited my life enough that I'm willing to sacrifice some freedoms for that convenience. Richard Stallman, however, cannot be happy if you make that decision on your own. Eventually, you have to ask yourself if you want to spend your life obeying what an influential person tells you to do (and sacrifice conveniences to hold the world to a higher standard which will never be realized), or realize that ships sail and you'd rather be on the ship than yelling at it with clenched fist from the harbor.
If everyone in the US was a murderer, it hopefully still wouldn't make murder a positive thing. Same for privacy violations and restrictions on freedom.
Well, I'd caution you not to make argumentum ad populum an organizing principle in your life. I've seen it attempted many times and rarely if ever does it result in increased happiness.
He also hates many things that aren't popular as well. The popularity of what is being criticized seems an odd way to gauge the worth of the criticism.
I literally just bought a book of Amazon three minutes ago. I couldn't find it anywhere else. A local author and the book was only available in hardcover. I guess I'm just a sucker for convenience.
What about reasons not to listen to Stallman? There are other ethical views than just his.
In addition to being practical, it's morally good for individual programmers to work on commercial products solely for their own long-term gain, and that doing so doesn't come at the expense of others. Others are free to buy those products if they wish. The fact that so many people choose to do so is evidence of the tremendous value that paid developers and companies provide.
A complex subject. Stallman makes valid points, we do need fair laws that keep corporations from bad behavior while otherwise staying out of their way to do business.
I vote with my wallet at two extremes. Locally, I enjoy spending money at the small businesses in my neighborhood that I really hope stay in business and make a fair profit. At the other end of the business-size spectrum, I love the convenience of Amazon for ordering physical goods and having them delivered to my home in the mountains.
I understand the negative aspects of DRM but I really like the Kindle platform. It is true that I may not always have access in the distant future to what I have bought, but in most cases I won't want a lot of what I buy to read in 10 years (and it will probably be available for as long as I live anyway). I pay a lot less (usually) for Kindle format books and they are available on all of my devices, with automatic syncing to furthest location read. Also, my study/home office is already filled to capacity with bookshelves - now I just buy really special books (on Go, Chess, Art books, some classic computer science, etc.) as physical books and enjoy otherwise saving the space on my bookshelves.
Seems unfair for Stallman to criticize the fact that they stopped funding ALEC after many people asked them too. It's kind of like taking hostages, having all your demands met, and then killing all the hostages anyway. Why will Amazon change if we criticize them for doing something we asked them to do?
Interesting article. When you make an alternative to Amazon which has a similar selection and shipping time I will consider it.
I do not have a local book shop. My supermarket which is strangling farmers, killing off grocers, butchers, video game shops etc only have the best sellers list.
I have yet to find an alternative which is consistently cheap and delivers next day or the day after with free shipping..
To your points.
> Amazon publishes ebooks designed to attack your freedom
This is no different from music. I could choose to buy a physical book but sometimes I feel that my kindle could get it faster and I could save space in my house which already is littered with large books.
> Amazon's on-line music "sales" have some of the same problems as the ebooks
This is the same as a number of other music retailers. If I want to avoid this I will get a DVD. Just because Amazon offers you a convenient option doesn't mean you have to take it. I would rather save space in my house and save the environment by purchasing digital music than buy a CD which will be scanned onto my computer once then left on a shelf.
> Amazon's shipping in the US is done in a sweatshop
Oh well.. this is something state officials should look into. I have seen the UK distribution center a number of times on the news and it looks alright.
> Amazon cut off service to Wikileaks
Oh well.. it is Amazon's service. Wikileaks can use another. I use a service and I cut people off fairly often due to the content they post. They broke my terms -> They go. The end. They can build their own software. Or in Wikileaks case.. find another host / make their own.
> Amazon squeezes small publishers.
Amazon looks to give the best deal possible to the customer. Sometimes people get trodden on. If Amazon won't do you an agreeable deal go elsewhere. Make an organization with similar companies and reject any deals which you cannot agree to. Throw your weight behind a different ebook reader.
> Amazon doesn't just compete with independent book stores, it arrogantly seeks to destroy them.
Please.. there are app's like this which compare prices all over the place. Again. Amazon looks to give the best deal possible to the customer. When I buy from a bookshop I know I am paying more. That is fine because I can see the book, touch the book and take it home then and there. Most people know this.
Sometimes a local book store cannot sell a book even remotely competitively. An app which told me this would be nice. I don't mind paying a few pounds more in a store. When it is £5-10 there is a problem with the shop.
> Amazon appears to treat self-published authors well, but it can unilaterally cut the price of their books. And when it does, the authors are the ones who lose.
It is an authors choice whether they use the publishing platform or not. I wouldn't after hearing how Amazon auto-discounted an authors book and the author got screwed.
> Amazon censored an ebook that exposed how ebook bestseller lists can be manipulated (and therefore are meaningless).
Is this so unexpected? Guy tries to publish book on Amazon about how to game the Amazon review and ranking system...
> Amazon was a member of ALEC.
Oh well.
Amazon isn't a saint. They are responsible for putting a number of small businesses out of business. They damage the high street. However.. look at any major superstore. Its just the evolution of business. I will not be boycotting Amazon any time soon.
The only legitimate reason I can think of to not order off of Amazon is because sometimes you end up paying for express shipping when they would have got the item out to you in the same amount of time anyway.
I don't find a single one of these "reasons" even remotely compelling as cause not to do business with Amazon. Were I to run Amazon tomorrow, I would change not one of these policies.
This is true, Amazon is moving toward more automated shipping. It will lower prices and improve conditions for workers that remain. One evil cured, eh?
That could be a negative since you removed a bunch of jobs. Also working in 100 degree warehouse isn't that bad, i spent many summers working on a farm in a lot worse conditions(heat, sun and ankle deep in pig manure). Using the same logic we should stop eating.
The number 1 reason is the practice of letting you click all the way to "ship to address" screen before telling you that they cannot ship the selected item to your location.
This is extremely frustrating! Why are they advertising products they are not willing to sell? (This problem is rampant in Finland, probably not applicable to USA)
Technically, your state government charges sales tax. Amazon just helps them enforce it, instead of trusting that you'll be honest and pay it yourself.
[+] [-] simonsarris|13 years ago|reply
Yes, companies want to kill competition by any means and do all sorts of bad-for-the-consumer and bad-for-workers things. We didn't just wake up yesterday into the industrial era. That's all of capitalism. Amazon isn't special, just high-profile.
> if you rent a server from Amazon, you have no rights.
Amazon isn't in the business of granting rights.
If you don't like any of the things included in Stallman's list, don't expect change to come from Amazon or some boycott thereof. The change should come from us by way of better governance.
I feel like Stallman missed a good time to make a positive point on why we need better governance and perhaps regulation to reign in the much uglier parts of corporations/capitalism/behavior that we might as a society not like. He could have been inspiring and spoken to a much wider audience than the paranoia crowd.
Instead he wanted to make a negative piece about Amazon. It made the top of HN, where we'll talk aboutit for 15 hours, and then nobody else will listen.
More generally I think its safe to say that people will not listen to a boycott that inconveniences them. They might listen to a positive message on the reasons we should support and enact laws upholding digital freedoms, worker rights, and things to stop anti-competitive practices.
There are a lot of digital freedom causes worth championing, but I'm always disappointed by Stallman. It's easy to hate. We need more positive people that can frame causes like this more effectively.
[+] [-] Codhisattva|13 years ago|reply
Rights are not granted by anything. They describe the extent of government power. That is all.
[+] [-] chamanbuga|13 years ago|reply
Agreed! We won't get Amazon or any of these large corporations to change by boycotting their services (w/ no success). Instead we need to push for tech savy people to make it high up in Washington and European Union so that they protect customer interests instead of granting corporations all the power.
[+] [-] shortlived|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chimeracoder|13 years ago|reply
Devil's advocate: Rights are inherent, and an external authority (government, etc.) cannot by definition grant them; it can only restrict them (though whether it should is separate).
It's a subtle point, but I bring this up because it's more in line with the way Stallman thinks, so to miss that point (for any other readers) is to misunderstand Stallman.
[+] [-] aeurielesn|13 years ago|reply
This is real. There is something wrong with the way Amazon deals with ebooks, and it is sad to see people backing it up.
---
[1]: http://stallman.org/articles/ebooks.pdf
[2]: http://gnu.org/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html
[+] [-] hiddenstage|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] InclinedPlane|13 years ago|reply
There are many things I don't like about how Amazon deals with ebooks, but there are many things that are good about it as well, and I prefer to not let perfect be the enemy of good.
[+] [-] sseveran|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] the_mitsuhiko|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raverbashing|13 years ago|reply
Independent bookstores are nice, but they fail to account for the long tail, that's where Amazon shines.
And for the "common books" the big chains do an ok job. E.g. Harry Potter
(Still, physical B&N stores seem to be going away, Borders is history already)
[+] [-] fletchowns|13 years ago|reply
What does that have to do with any of the things he mentioned in the post?
[+] [-] jspthrowaway|13 years ago|reply
On one hand, you have things like "never let the perfect be the enemy of the good; better to have a product that works than to get everything right".
On the other, you have things like "Amazon puts DRM on their ebooks and terminated Wikileaks. Boycott everything they do."
Amazon is innovative enough and has benefited my life enough that I'm willing to sacrifice some freedoms for that convenience. Richard Stallman, however, cannot be happy if you make that decision on your own. Eventually, you have to ask yourself if you want to spend your life obeying what an influential person tells you to do (and sacrifice conveniences to hold the world to a higher standard which will never be realized), or realize that ships sail and you'd rather be on the ship than yelling at it with clenched fist from the harbor.
[+] [-] Codhisattva|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ceejayoz|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rhizome|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] csmattryder|13 years ago|reply
Not knocking what he stands for though, digital freedom is important, but nothing seems to be truly ethical. It's the price we pay for convenience.
[+] [-] mcantelon|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thewordis|13 years ago|reply
* Cheap
* Consistent
* Fast shipping
* Good product availability
* Good return policies
* Vendor and item ratings
[+] [-] mcantelon|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] benguild|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cvanderlinden|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxharris|13 years ago|reply
In addition to being practical, it's morally good for individual programmers to work on commercial products solely for their own long-term gain, and that doing so doesn't come at the expense of others. Others are free to buy those products if they wish. The fact that so many people choose to do so is evidence of the tremendous value that paid developers and companies provide.
[+] [-] mark_l_watson|13 years ago|reply
I vote with my wallet at two extremes. Locally, I enjoy spending money at the small businesses in my neighborhood that I really hope stay in business and make a fair profit. At the other end of the business-size spectrum, I love the convenience of Amazon for ordering physical goods and having them delivered to my home in the mountains.
I understand the negative aspects of DRM but I really like the Kindle platform. It is true that I may not always have access in the distant future to what I have bought, but in most cases I won't want a lot of what I buy to read in 10 years (and it will probably be available for as long as I live anyway). I pay a lot less (usually) for Kindle format books and they are available on all of my devices, with automatic syncing to furthest location read. Also, my study/home office is already filled to capacity with bookshelves - now I just buy really special books (on Go, Chess, Art books, some classic computer science, etc.) as physical books and enjoy otherwise saving the space on my bookshelves.
[+] [-] jrockway|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bobsy|13 years ago|reply
I do not have a local book shop. My supermarket which is strangling farmers, killing off grocers, butchers, video game shops etc only have the best sellers list.
I have yet to find an alternative which is consistently cheap and delivers next day or the day after with free shipping..
To your points.
> Amazon publishes ebooks designed to attack your freedom
This is no different from music. I could choose to buy a physical book but sometimes I feel that my kindle could get it faster and I could save space in my house which already is littered with large books.
> Amazon's on-line music "sales" have some of the same problems as the ebooks
This is the same as a number of other music retailers. If I want to avoid this I will get a DVD. Just because Amazon offers you a convenient option doesn't mean you have to take it. I would rather save space in my house and save the environment by purchasing digital music than buy a CD which will be scanned onto my computer once then left on a shelf.
> Amazon's shipping in the US is done in a sweatshop
Oh well.. this is something state officials should look into. I have seen the UK distribution center a number of times on the news and it looks alright.
> Amazon cut off service to Wikileaks
Oh well.. it is Amazon's service. Wikileaks can use another. I use a service and I cut people off fairly often due to the content they post. They broke my terms -> They go. The end. They can build their own software. Or in Wikileaks case.. find another host / make their own.
> Amazon squeezes small publishers.
Amazon looks to give the best deal possible to the customer. Sometimes people get trodden on. If Amazon won't do you an agreeable deal go elsewhere. Make an organization with similar companies and reject any deals which you cannot agree to. Throw your weight behind a different ebook reader.
> Amazon doesn't just compete with independent book stores, it arrogantly seeks to destroy them.
Please.. there are app's like this which compare prices all over the place. Again. Amazon looks to give the best deal possible to the customer. When I buy from a bookshop I know I am paying more. That is fine because I can see the book, touch the book and take it home then and there. Most people know this.
Sometimes a local book store cannot sell a book even remotely competitively. An app which told me this would be nice. I don't mind paying a few pounds more in a store. When it is £5-10 there is a problem with the shop.
> Amazon appears to treat self-published authors well, but it can unilaterally cut the price of their books. And when it does, the authors are the ones who lose.
It is an authors choice whether they use the publishing platform or not. I wouldn't after hearing how Amazon auto-discounted an authors book and the author got screwed.
> Amazon censored an ebook that exposed how ebook bestseller lists can be manipulated (and therefore are meaningless).
Is this so unexpected? Guy tries to publish book on Amazon about how to game the Amazon review and ranking system...
> Amazon was a member of ALEC.
Oh well.
Amazon isn't a saint. They are responsible for putting a number of small businesses out of business. They damage the high street. However.. look at any major superstore. Its just the evolution of business. I will not be boycotting Amazon any time soon.
[+] [-] encoderer|13 years ago|reply
But I don't understand apologists and defenders like yourself.
[+] [-] rickdale|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AlexeiSadeski|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robertp|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] piffey|13 years ago|reply
http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/19/amazon-acquires-online-fulf...
[+] [-] adrr|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SeppoErviala|13 years ago|reply
This is extremely frustrating! Why are they advertising products they are not willing to sell? (This problem is rampant in Finland, probably not applicable to USA)
[+] [-] kmfrk|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] staunch|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] teraflop|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] listic|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bartv331|13 years ago|reply
This is a free market, Amazon wins, the other loses. End of story. Just ordered another book ON AMAZON. Free shipping, no sales tax!!
[+] [-] jlgreco|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hyhyhy|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]