Anybody else boycotting Amazon because of their cowardice in de-hosting Wikileaks? I don't want to hurt the ERE book, but I think this is called for...
Wikileaks > Amazon
I never liked Amazon.com. They are just too big. They are trying to take it all over. They are the on- line equivalent of World*Mart. If you notice, they keep too much information on you. You order a wahoo, and next time you sign on, they show you an upgraded wahoo. And lots of wahoo accessories. They email you with wahoo sales, because you once bought one. They keep too many records of what you buy, and target you. I quit them because it seems a privacy thing. And, I am "gun-tottin" protective of my privacy.
No, I don't really care. I don't read wikileaks, and im not sure what you think amazon should have done.. Fight a losing battle in court?
As for local bookstores, amazon gives me far better service at a competitive price. I have no problem with this unless they are engaging in predatory pricing (which is a possibility I don't dismiss, but haven't seen evidence of). It is scary to see the world flatten, but I think it's better for everyone in the long run, even if it means life will change and our "standard of living" in the us may decrease.
As for local bookstores, amazon gives me far better service at a competitive price. I have no problem with this unless they are engaging in predatory pricing (which is a possibility I don't dismiss, but haven't seen evidence of). It is scary to see the world flatten, but I think it's better for everyone in the long run, even if it means life will change and our "standard of living" in the us may decrease.
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15994
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
The way I see it is as a battle between nation states (eventually to be an outdated concept with diminished importance and eventually replaced by corporations and internet organizations ... much like the power of the nation state replaced the power of the Roman Catholic church) and internet organizations.
Using the traditional vernacular, in the wikileaks case, amazon, a corporation, is like a neutral country. They didn't ask for Cyber War I, they're not a part of it; Traditionally ships have been allowed in for 24 hours but then they had to leave.
So no, I won't be boycotting amazon, paypal, visa, mastercard, or other corporations which have been touched by this war.
What wikileaks should have done and what they have done is to distribute themselves on mirrorsites in the first place. This first the new structure (corporations and net-orgs) much better.
It shouldn't be too hard to set up an alternate currency either which is outside national control but is somewhat accepted globally. Forsooth, I believe there's already such a currency in World of Warcraft, no?
The fact that the nation state(s) are powerless against the internet shows that they're getting outdated. It's simply a naturalization consequence of globalization. It's not as hard to have seen this coming as it is to accept it. It's a paradigm shift.
In that regard there's simply a lot of confusion because the shift is happening now and people are still thinking and commenting within the old paradigm. Wikileaks will probably die and get replaced by something that fits the new system without relying on the old. That "thing" will be impossible to fight. Makes sense?
(Incidentally, what's currently going on totally reminds me of the book Daemon (Daniel Suarez)... someone should make a movie ;-P ).
[On a side note, I love amazon! Without amazon (or similar fat tail retailers), that is, if we had to depend exclusively on local/small bookstores, all we'd see would be blockbuster biographies of brain dead actors and other stuff written to appeal to the lowest common denominator. LBSs sell books on consignment and generally wont allocate shelf-space unless they're sure they can sell the books. I do remember the time when all we had was the LBS. Very little choice there. Unless a book would go and sell 25000 copies, you wouldn't see it (to compare, the ERE book has sold 951 to date---I don't think you're going to find it any local book store despite the fact that any local bookstore can actually order it home for its shelves). Then came university bookstores which was a significant improvement. Then university libraries. Amazon (or B&N) have even greater availability.]
Using the traditional vernacular, in the wikileaks case, amazon, a corporation, is like a neutral country. They didn't ask for Cyber War I, they're not a part of it; Traditionally ships have been allowed in for 24 hours but then they had to leave.
So no, I won't be boycotting amazon, paypal, visa, mastercard, or other corporations which have been touched by this war.
What wikileaks should have done and what they have done is to distribute themselves on mirrorsites in the first place. This first the new structure (corporations and net-orgs) much better.
It shouldn't be too hard to set up an alternate currency either which is outside national control but is somewhat accepted globally. Forsooth, I believe there's already such a currency in World of Warcraft, no?
The fact that the nation state(s) are powerless against the internet shows that they're getting outdated. It's simply a naturalization consequence of globalization. It's not as hard to have seen this coming as it is to accept it. It's a paradigm shift.
In that regard there's simply a lot of confusion because the shift is happening now and people are still thinking and commenting within the old paradigm. Wikileaks will probably die and get replaced by something that fits the new system without relying on the old. That "thing" will be impossible to fight. Makes sense?
(Incidentally, what's currently going on totally reminds me of the book Daemon (Daniel Suarez)... someone should make a movie ;-P ).
[On a side note, I love amazon! Without amazon (or similar fat tail retailers), that is, if we had to depend exclusively on local/small bookstores, all we'd see would be blockbuster biographies of brain dead actors and other stuff written to appeal to the lowest common denominator. LBSs sell books on consignment and generally wont allocate shelf-space unless they're sure they can sell the books. I do remember the time when all we had was the LBS. Very little choice there. Unless a book would go and sell 25000 copies, you wouldn't see it (to compare, the ERE book has sold 951 to date---I don't think you're going to find it any local book store despite the fact that any local bookstore can actually order it home for its shelves). Then came university bookstores which was a significant improvement. Then university libraries. Amazon (or B&N) have even greater availability.]
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15994
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
@utility73 - I don't see how that follows. What's outdated is the legal, cultural, and commercial geographical restraint on any form of organization.
Internet organizations are global in scope. Corporations are global in scope. Nations aren't.
People are increasingly identifying themselves by their jobs and interest rather than the color of their passport. One example from the US is that people are perfectly okay with corporate health care, whereas half of them shun government health care.
Internet organizations are global in scope. Corporations are global in scope. Nations aren't.
People are increasingly identifying themselves by their jobs and interest rather than the color of their passport. One example from the US is that people are perfectly okay with corporate health care, whereas half of them shun government health care.
I like Amazon a lot too, which is what makes boycotting it such an inconvenience. I appreciate Jacob's 50,000-foot view of the political situation, and dragoncar's pragmatic attorney's view.
Nevertheless, I support increased transparency in government (and business), and I see a much greater danger in opacity of government than in the sort of disclosures Wikileaks has made public.
I don't know enough to say whether Wikileaks' new structure is better or not, but on principle Amazon's stock has fallen in my eyes.
Nevertheless, I support increased transparency in government (and business), and I see a much greater danger in opacity of government than in the sort of disclosures Wikileaks has made public.
I don't know enough to say whether Wikileaks' new structure is better or not, but on principle Amazon's stock has fallen in my eyes.
EMJ: No, a lower price does not alone imply predatory pricing. They might (and probably do) just have a much lower cost structure. Furthermore, "list" price is just a made up number by publishers with its own anti-competitive overtones. If Amazon lowered prices below its own cost just long enough to drive local bookstores out of business and then raised prices above those bookstore's original prices once they cornered the market, then that would clearly be predatory. There's also a gray area in between, but in general if they are selling books over cost I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15994
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
As far as I understand, amazon simply won't be undercut---they have web crawlers scanning the net for cheaper prices and the amazon price is essentially set by that. In addition they have very favorable accounts payable terms(*) which allows them to make money on their float as their overhead is very small.
(*) I still haven't seen the money for the kindle books I've sold in the US almost 2 months ago. I won't get it until end of this month.
(*) I still haven't seen the money for the kindle books I've sold in the US almost 2 months ago. I won't get it until end of this month.
@jacob - It's not uncommon in the corporate world to not pay vendors for several months at a time. The larger the power difference is between the two entities/corporations, the more favorable the accounts payable tends to become for the larger entity/corporation. It actually reminds me a lot of how large kids tend to bully small kids on a playground...
I bought two copies of the book from Amazon - one to gift.
Anywho, I am on the opposite side of this whole commentary... I think what Wikileaks is doing is not at all right nor serving some idyllic purpose. They only release items about the US - pretty bias to me. Why no Iranian cables? Or Russian cables? or anything on any other country? Just good 'ol USA.
In any case, some things we, the people, just don't need to know. I don't see what's so wrong with that. I am glad we do not get mortared daily like Israel, have running clean drinking water unlike our neighbor(s) to the south, and generally have no worries outside of "the small stuff" due to our "big bully" status.
Anywho, I am on the opposite side of this whole commentary... I think what Wikileaks is doing is not at all right nor serving some idyllic purpose. They only release items about the US - pretty bias to me. Why no Iranian cables? Or Russian cables? or anything on any other country? Just good 'ol USA.
In any case, some things we, the people, just don't need to know. I don't see what's so wrong with that. I am glad we do not get mortared daily like Israel, have running clean drinking water unlike our neighbor(s) to the south, and generally have no worries outside of "the small stuff" due to our "big bully" status.
Q: Wikileaks has leaked a ton of information from all over the world. Of course, the US related leaks get more attention in the US. I've never even been to the site and I know this. Not to be rude, but perhaps you should do a modicum of research before forming an opinion on the subject.
Here is a list of notable leaks: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... eaks#Leaks
Here is a list of notable leaks: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... eaks#Leaks
Now I am not all that up on this wikileakage, but what I have read so far does not seem to threaten the security of the USA.
I see no maps of defense installations, no plans to invade anyone, no charts showing strengths or weaknesses of the military, or things I would classify as release of vital classified security information that could be easily used against the country. They may be included in this but I have not read them nor have I actually read many of them. What I have seen is things like some diplomat calling the president of Iran to be like Hitler. Is this news? Or saying some other person like the British PM Brown was a joke. Again. news? So is the pain of it only these countries knowing what we think of them? Americans are pretty pointed and rude in person, and worse if not thought we are heard.
I know there is a lot more to this. Someone up on it tell us the worst things that were released. I am saying I don't really know other than the news articles I read on it. There was something about the banks I think. If you think this is bad you should hear how your friends talk about you when your not around. Same thing isn't it?
I am waiting to hear how wiki released the stuff that poses grave damage to the security of the USA. That would spark my interest big time, and would demand resolution by justice.
If a US diplomat says in a cable some of the middle eastern countries are nasty and wipe their tail end with their left hand, well I already knew that from being over there. There may be some in the USA that do that as well. (I don't personally know anyone who does).
Maybe the dangers are that countries will lose faith in the USA? Would that be earth shattering news? At this point, I don't have the full story, so I am reserving opinion.
I see no maps of defense installations, no plans to invade anyone, no charts showing strengths or weaknesses of the military, or things I would classify as release of vital classified security information that could be easily used against the country. They may be included in this but I have not read them nor have I actually read many of them. What I have seen is things like some diplomat calling the president of Iran to be like Hitler. Is this news? Or saying some other person like the British PM Brown was a joke. Again. news? So is the pain of it only these countries knowing what we think of them? Americans are pretty pointed and rude in person, and worse if not thought we are heard.
I know there is a lot more to this. Someone up on it tell us the worst things that were released. I am saying I don't really know other than the news articles I read on it. There was something about the banks I think. If you think this is bad you should hear how your friends talk about you when your not around. Same thing isn't it?
I am waiting to hear how wiki released the stuff that poses grave damage to the security of the USA. That would spark my interest big time, and would demand resolution by justice.
If a US diplomat says in a cable some of the middle eastern countries are nasty and wipe their tail end with their left hand, well I already knew that from being over there. There may be some in the USA that do that as well. (I don't personally know anyone who does).
Maybe the dangers are that countries will lose faith in the USA? Would that be earth shattering news? At this point, I don't have the full story, so I am reserving opinion.
-
MadPenguin
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:25 pm
I think Apple should be added to this boycott: http://gizmodo.com/5715549/apple-remove ... iphone-app
Time to burn those iPads!
Time to burn those iPads!