706
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] joe@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Hindsight makes people come to very foolish conclusions.

Hint: what if it didn't turn out to be Amazon?

[-] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 22 hours ago

404 media was already thorough in its previous research before actually tracking a book order. Despite your insinuation, there was no foolishness.

But if we follow your billionaire defense to its logical conclusion, they should not have bothered verifying their leads, and left the space billionaire alone.

[-] joe@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

there was no foolishness

The foolishness was yours. "The ends (in hindsight) justify the means" is not a particularly wise stance.

Like I said, what if it wasn't Amazon that was ordering the books; would it then be okay?

I understand the dislike of billionaires, but don't let it stop you from thinking.

[-] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 19 hours ago

The foolishness was yours

You don't need to stoop to insults.

what if it wasn’t Amazon that was ordering the books

Then the responsible journalists wouldn't publish the story. I don't know why you have so much disdain for this independent group.

I'd hate to hear your takes when Ed Snowden "illegally" leaked files to journalists.

I'm thinking about how your concern (which is borderline concern trolling) leaves no way to hold billionaires and their unethical companies accountable.

Like you said:

“The ends (in hindsight) justify the means” is not a particularly wise stance.

Just imagine if we applied this to the AI weirdos.

[-] joe@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago

Then the responsible journalists wouldn't publish the story.

My concern isn't the story, it's the "hiding a tracking device in an order with an anonymous party". That's an invasion of privacy no matter who it's done to. You're presumably only okay with it because you dislike who it was done to, which is why I'm asking you to consider it without hindsight. What if it were done to someone other than Amazon? Do you still support that invasion of privacy? Why or why not?

[-] XLE@piefed.social 0 points 9 hours ago

Amazon isn't a person, no corporation is. They should be subject to far more exposure.

[-] joe@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

They didn't know it was Amazon when they hid a tracking device in someone's order. They suspected, only.

What if it had been a small bookstore, or just some collector? Do you approve of those people being tracked?

Are you really not seeing this, or are you pretending to not get it?

this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2026
706 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

87315 readers
3526 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS