They’re paying out the salaries for an excess of labor cost. No one looks at the balance sheet after several months and notices results far in excess of budget?

Excerpt from the linked content^1 by Eugene Kim:

>Amazon had little oversight over its job opening process until last year, allowing managers to recruit far more, and ultimately hire more employees, than they were approved to bring on, Insider has learned.

>For example, the utility computing team at Amazon Web Service had 24,988 hiring job posts opened in 2022, when only 7,798 positions were approved for, according to an internal document obtained by Insider.

>That means the utility computing team had over 3-times more job postings than the headcount target at the time.

>The document points to Amazon's lack of standardization and governance for the gap between the job postings and open headcount.

> 

>The result was "a process prone to inconsistency, error, and potential mis-use," including "over-hiring," the document said.

>"This enabled over-hiring in certain cost centers and contributed to span of control and level ratio defects," the internal document said.

>Levels is tech-industry speak for an employee's seniority level, which determines their pay. In theory, if multiple job postings for the same job called for different seniority, a unit could wind up with more over-qualified, or under-qualified, people in the unit than planning budgets assumed.

>"Span of control" is industry jargon for the number of direct reports under each manager, according to Gartner.

^1 Eugene Kim for Insider/Axel Springer, 21 Mar. 2023, https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-flawed-job-listing-process-over-hiring-layoffs-2023-3

Edge is growing on me lately. Some stuff to strip out but there a few neat features. Won’t convert the Firefox diehards but I prefer it to Chrome now.

[removed]

[deleted]

[removed]

Absolutely, mid list authors are not getting the support they once did.

I'll take your word for it, but I still think there should be a better middle-ground where good authors get a fair deal and a decent push from publishers.

Dude, you gotta get info from multiple sources. Don't be one of those people that the media makes hating the victims while cheering for the victimizer.

> If the license to lend is included in a physical copy, not in a digital, how does that explain the same pricing for either in a lot of cases.

The pricing is entirely up to the creator and the publisher. No explanation is necessary simply because the price does not match your perception of value.

> Rights that were acquired trough spending a lot on legalized bribery (called lobbying).

Rights in this case are what I consider natural rights.

> The IP system as a whole is rotten

While I agree there are problems with it, I do not agree that one problem is that people who buy physical copies of a work should be allowed to make one digital copy and lend it out ad infinitum to people, whether it be one at a time or not.

> It’s already been established that this isn’t a problem.

Whether or not it's a "problem" is irrelevant. If slavery wasn't a "problem", it would still be wrong. Creators have a right to control their work.

> Libraries have created and loaned out braille books based on the OCR’d contents of their physical copies. That was deemed legal. This is exactly the same thing.

There's a specific carve-out for such use in existing copyright law. There is no such carve-out for digital copies of physical books -- yet.

> What rights are you losing and what is the personal harm with the loss of those rights?

The right to license the digital reproduction of my work as I decide. The right not to be obligated to allow digital reproduction of my work simply because a physical copy was sold.

> There is a balance between personal rights and those of the public at large.

That is a popular argument under the social contract theory of rights, but much of modern law (particularly US law) is founded under the natural law theory of rights, to which I morally abscribe.

And this is when the world realized that a clear motive is only needed for a murder.

The law of supply and demand knows no allegiance. Infinite supply with no price change? Goodbye demand.

Paying an author a dollar to buy a book that then gets lent out a thousand times is not a viable business model for authors.

Also IIRC there was an EU study showing the exact opposite about piracy (that was never fully published or something?) But I don't have a link to that on hand.

Damnit Cotton I hit you with the layup and you fumbled the fancy footwork.

[deleted]

[removed]

Understandable, upvoted your link

Punctikn doesn't make sense

But I'll still rely to the comment.

Does it make sense or not?

They want us to pay for shitty products, that’s it. This way they’re forced to work for more quality content otherwise not even pirates would download it imho

[removed]

well they'd drive consoles attractiveness down, waiting for people getting a pc and buying their games there. it's a elaborated effort to make pcs a monopoly in gaming world

I would need to get too close to others shit-smeared books to do that, the only ones I'll approach are mine.

I use Archive.org to get free books all the time - those books are ca. 100 years old and centered on either machinist topics, or statistical economic data, but it's still a wonderful resource.