[smt88]

The numbers would be useful, but only Amazon has them.

The qualitative case the article is making is this:

1. Amazon enforces brutal delivery speeds, giving drivers huge incentives to behave recklessly (and, in fact, rewarding the most reckless drivers).

2. Amazon profits from this.

3. People are harmed (sometimes in mild ways, like getting stuck in traffic, but sometimes by dying).

4. Amazon aggressively refuses financial, legal, or moral responsibility for the harm that's caused, sometimes suing to get away from it.

Even if it's "just" one person and lightning is more dangerous, the point is that Amazon is creating danger that would not otherwise exist, profiting from it, and refusing to be pay the costs.

It seems like almost no one commenting on this article read it.

[tracer4201]

These are pretty serious accusations, and unless you have data to back this up, it’s hard to take you seriously.

“Only Amazon has them” is an interesting way to shed yourself of any responsibility to actually defend your claims.

[smt88]

Yeah, again, it’s all in the article. That’s where the evidence is. I’m just repeatedly restating the article for people who didn’t read it.

I think it’s fairly uncontroversial that Amazon doesn’t publish data about its delivery contractors.

These types of articles were triggered by individuals being hurt or killed by Amazon contractors, trying to get Amazon to accept responsibility, and failing.