[skybrian]

It would be useful but it would probably require Amazon’s cooperation. I agree that it doesn’t mean the reporter did anything wrong to run the story with the info they could gather. Maybe someone from Amazon will explain in response to this story?

But there is a mystery at the heart of this story. Amazon’s decisions seem hard to explain. We should let it remain a mystery until we learn more, without either assuming they’re evil villains or speculating that there must be a logical explanation.

(And it might have been good for the story itself to say this.)

[throwaaskjdfh]

> Amazon’s decisions seem hard to explain. We should let it remain a mystery

This gets back to what I disagree with. If Amazon's decisions seem hard to explain, the decisions should be brought to the public's attention and Amazon should explain them. There is no reason for it to remain a mystery. And they'll never explain it unless there is a price to be paid for not explaining, e.g. being perceived as wasteful.

[skybrian]

Acknowledging a mystery doesn’t mean you don’t try to solve it. But you are making an assumption of political power we don’t have, as a small number of people commenting on Hacker News.

We can hope this story blows up enough that someone else, perhaps at Amazon, reveals some interesting information. But we’re not in control of whether that happens.