Post #2448719
2023-01-20 02:28 UTC
Replies (10)
-
@adamjcook@mastodon.social 2023-01-20 02:48
@jiva@devoe.social @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social I am with you on this. If this program benefitted small charities that do not possess large donation machinery and that would have otherwise received less if not for AmazonSmile, I am pleased to hear it. I think the truth of the program's origin should be known, but I can see the positive side here - even if Amazon did it ultimately for cynical reasons.
-
@cinja@ioc.exchange 2023-01-20 03:16
@jiva@devoe.social @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social while it may have been a semi evil intent, it's honestly kind of an ingenious hack. Don't pay Google AND do some good. I'm really disappointed the program is ending.
-
@mav@hackers.town 2023-01-20 04:11
@jiva@devoe.social @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social because their messaging is about being compassionate and actually giving of their own money when really what they're trying to do is use you to make money. How about this: You have some items around your house that you really want to throw in the trash or take to goodwill or something but your friend says that they'll deal with it for you. What they actually do is sell them on craigslist and make a tidy profit, but they never share that information with you. So you keep giving them stuff thinking that they're just being altruistic and helping you get rid of things that you don't want anymore - And they are, but they are leaving out the whole minor detail that they're profiting off your stuff. Immoral? No. The sort of thing a friend would do? Definitely not.
-
@tolortslubor@mas.to 2023-01-20 13:06
@jiva@devoe.social @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social Amazon is a criminal corporation, predatory and monopolistic, profits over humanity and society. This cynical greed-driven charity cost savings plan is just one more example of the negative impact of Amazon on human society, and the fact that #Amazon is cutting it out is further proof of that
-
@mrzaius@hachyderm.io 2023-01-20 13:35
@jiva@devoe.social @uliwitness@chaos.social Not all aspects of it are - Just interesting seeing the internal politics around it and the seeming lack of a real altruistic intent at its creation. Edited to add: And where that trips them up from a UX angle, where users have to quite consciously edit URLs to make it all work.
-
@not2b@sfba.social 2023-01-21 01:15
@jiva@devoe.social @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social Capitalism is almost never compassionate, but there are people in capitalist organizations who are. My take on this is that people saw an opportunity to take money from Google, give a cut of it to charity, have the company look good and still make more money. But they only got to do it because the result was that Amazon made more money.
-
@SteveBHolt@sciences.social 2023-01-21 05:12
@jiva@devoe.social @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social Well, if at base it's related to cost savings, there's nothing in the incentives or motives that ensures the happy accident of charity rather than, say, a different route for capturing those sales without Google. That is, in this case that route went charity, but the incentives are as likely to produce non-altruistic outcomes, and those outcomes might be good, bad, or neutral in terms of social benefits.
-
@leonardo@mastodon.bida.im 2023-01-21 08:57
@jiva@devoe.social Probably because there is no compassion in exploiting a government policy. The purpose here is not charity, it is just a side effect, and in the same moment the same capitalist system finds a more effective (profitable) tool which coincidentally doesn't involve charity, it will just adopt the new one. I see no morality, nor compassion, just very clever hacks @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social
-
@kavana@scholar.social 2023-01-22 08:59
@jiva@devoe.social I'd recommend reading Winners Take All by Anand Giridhardas. It highlights the very real harms that charity serves to cover up. Additionally, charity models exist because of increased wealth inequality and lower taxes: we wouldn't need charities if governments were providing adequate social security. Private charity systems mean lower public accountability for what the money is being used for. @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social
-
@Mr_Teatime@social.tchncs.de 2023-01-23 21:06
@jiva@devoe.social well that idea about compassion is exactly what these former employees dispel, comprehensively. Amazon uses their customers' compassion because it makes them money. If it made them money, they would also happily ruin those non-profits. Actually, mqybe they do, but they wouldn't talk about it, of course. That's not compassion, that's pragmatism, leading to one positive externality, which they're milking for PR. @mrzaius@hachyderm.io @uliwitness@chaos.social