this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
340 points (85.4% liked)

Technology

85274 readers
4151 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 17 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Do you really think that Amazon should be allowed to set prices outside their marketplace? That's wild.

[–] 0x0@infosec.pub -3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You are allowed to not market yourself at amazon, i dont see the issue really

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Amazon is one of the largest online retailers in the world. If they force prices on suppliers to get a better deal than anyone else, that's between extortion and price fixing.

[–] 0x0@infosec.pub -3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Sounds like not shopping or selling at amazon is the actual solution to the problem. I havent bought a single item of them in my life, so why do you?

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

So as long as you don't shop at Amazon, it's fine if they do illegal shit.

Got it.

[–] 0x0@infosec.pub -5 points 6 days ago

Is that a 'yes' on you being a customer at amazon?

[–] vagrancyand@sh.itjust.works -5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

For the same thing sold on their marketplace, yes. Literally you are voluntarily agreeing to use a private marketplace, you should agree to all their rules or just stop using that marketplace.

Amazon isn't a public service. They aren't a Farmer's market run by the city. They aren't a sidewalk. If you would like a public version of Amazon that doesn't have those restrictions and would be cheaper for literally everyone, advocate for that. But until a public alternative exists then yes, Amazon can and should impose whatever rules it wants. Alternatives will appear if it becomes too restrictive and the platform will die.

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That's insanity. Under those terms, most suppliers would be at the whims of platform owners.

Microsoft asking Valve for a 50% cut? Sure. Google delisting a website because the owner criticized their CEO? Absolutely. Amazon telling you to sell at a loss or not sell at all? Why not.

[–] vagrancyand@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That’s insanity. Under those terms, most suppliers would be at the whims of platform owners.

Congrats, you found one of the many problems with the concept of capitalism.

Microsoft asking Valve for a 50% cut? Sure. Google delisting a website because the owner criticized their CEO? Absolutely. Amazon telling you to sell at a loss or not sell at all? Why not.

Yes. That is how all that works. Because they are all private companies and it is voluntary to use their services.

If you think those services should be neutral, congrats, you're advocating for communism. I think communism is pretty cool and there should be a state-run online marketplace that is entirely non-profit. But you seem to think you should or could force companies to be that public entity. That's not only not realistic and not how the world has ever worked under capitalism, but it's just simply a bad idea. Look at the USPS for why you should not have a private entity perform a public service.

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

But you seem to think you should or could force companies to be that public entity. That’s not only not realistic and not how the world has ever worked under capitalism, but it’s just simply a bad idea.

I disagree. There are plenty of success stories of companies being forced by governments to act in the best interest of consumers, from adopting USB-C to removing lead from gasoline.

Look at the USPS for why you should not have a private entity perform a public service.

You are conflating very different things here, I'm afraid.

[–] vagrancyand@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You are conflating very different things here, I’m afraid.

I'm really not. You want a neutral marketplace that just provides a service without a profit motive. That's what it comes down to. Because any service that requires a profit will naturally protect that profit, and that includes excluding suppliers that are actively sabotaging it.

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

No, I want marketplaces to operate in good faith and following the law. Don't think that's so much to ask.

[–] vagrancyand@sh.itjust.works -4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

There is nothing illegal being done by steam kiddo. And 'good faith' is defending themselves against sabotage, which is what ubisoft is suing for the ability to do here.

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

There is nothing illegal being done by steam kiddo.

That's for the courts to decide, "kiddo".

And ‘good faith’ is defending themselves against sabotage, which is what ubisoft is suing for the ability to do here.

Nice exercise of brand loyalty, but irrelevant in this scenario.

[–] vagrancyand@sh.itjust.works -4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That’s for the courts to decide, “kiddo”.

They did in the 1980s with walmart, kiddo.

Nice exercise of brand loyalty, but irrelevant in this scenario.

Incorrect, this is an 'exercise' of explaining a very basic fact of capitalism that has been happening longer than the word 'capitalism' has existed. This policy is the default for all stores on Earth.

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

You are very clearly out of your depth here, and very much wrong, so maybe drop the patronizing tone a little bit.

They did in the 1980s with walmart, kiddo.

Unless you can quote the exact precedent, I'm going to take the Sherman Antitrust Act over whatever you say.

Incorrect, this is an ‘exercise’ of explaining a very basic fact of capitalism that has been happening longer than the word ‘capitalism’ has existed. This policy is the default for all stores on Earth.

Marketplaces can set the prices of the items sold at their locations. They cannot set the prices of items outside of them. Doing so is price fixing, plain and simple.

[–] Aedis@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Absolutely, stop using Amazon. Except what's the alternative? They've wedged themselves in that space, and bought out any other competitor. So either they get forced to compete with themselves (by breaking the company apart) or they adhere to anti-monopoly laws where they're not allowed to influence other prices as part of their agreement.

[–] vagrancyand@sh.itjust.works -4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Except what’s the alternative? They’ve wedged themselves in that space, and bought out any other competitor.

Aliexpress, walmart.com, ebay.com, wayfair.com, any manufacturer's website. Or the actual global leader in the space, Alibaba which dwarfs Amazon's entire marketplace with over twice the users and easily a thousand times the suppliers.

So either they get forced to compete with themselves (by breaking the company apart) or they adhere to anti-monopoly laws where they’re not allowed to influence other prices as part of their agreement.

Or, if people think private companies should be neutral, like a public service... PEOPLE SHOULD FUCKING ADVOCATE AND ORDER THEIR GOVERNMENTS TO PROVIDE A PUBLIC SERVICE.

It is infinitely easier and better to get the government to do things for you than it is to force a private company to do things for you.

[–] Aedis@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Afaik Walmart does the same.

EBay is a different service as is Wayfair.

Your own website as the manufacturer doesn't have the reach of these other platforms. (in an age of SEO and AI searches it really doesn't have to be that way).

The strongest argument here is in favor of Aliexpress. Which isn't without issues and heavily lobbied by amazon to have even more issues in the US.