So... they wrote American but they are confusing anti-consumer tactics with an entire country, even though they were not going for that.
Just want to point out:
* Samsung has been accused of releasing software updates that degrade performance, forcing you to buy newer devices - Samsung is not American
* Brother - Japanese printer maker, I LOVE their printers mind you, but they've released firmware upgrades that prevent or degrade compatibility with third party ink cartridges
* Epson - Also Japanese, also have owned some of their printers, same thing with third party ink cartridges.
I'm sure there's many more companies, not from the US who do equally if not worse evils with software / hardware.
What the author is after isn't American products, just anti-consumerism, which can be impossible to predict mind you. Anyone of any country can do it.
Aurornis · 2h ago
When I reached the part about watching a lot of Louis Rossmann videos it made more sense. I have to be careful with my words because there are a lot of Louis Rossmann fans on HN. Rossmann is a very charismatic influencer who speaks with a confident and soothing tone and positions himself as someone just telling the facts for the benefits of his viewers. I've written before about how he tends to jump to conclusions, launch videos based on rumors, ignore facts that contradict juicy controversies, and stir the pot while positioning himself as the only rational source for a subject.
Note that I'm not saying Louis Rossmann is always wrong, nor that I disagree with him on everything, nor that I dislike the good things he does, nor any of the other numerous straw-man arguments that people come up with when you bring up issues with his influencer activity. However, he's the type of influencer who seems to lure in people who let their guard down and stop thinking critically for themselves, which opens the door to articles like this one where the conclusion isn't entirely rational but it feels rational after watching Louis Rossmann talk about it for hours and hours.
Conflating America, the country, with American companies, ignoring all of the non-American companies doing the same practices, and then bringing up a non-American company as the lone supporting example is all consistent with the dynamic I'm describing. The conclusion is assumed to be correct, because it's correct in the world of Louis Rossmann, but putting it to words outside of the YouTube influencer bubble falls apart on any critical thinking.
gchamonlive · 48m ago
Thanks for the condescending comment, but I can think for myself and I stand by every comment I have. I've watched the videos that I linked and I think that's just outrageous. If you think it's ok for a company to sell you a product and after purchase hide some functionalities behind a subscription, you not only a victim anymore, but a part of the problem.
tempodox · 29m ago
> If you think it's ok for a company …
They said nothing of the sort. You seem to have a penchant for jumping to conclusions. Likewise with conflating a country with a bunch of companies. Cool down, your outrage seems to cloud your thinking.
IAmBroom · 30m ago
> If you think it's ok for a company to sell you a product and after purchase hide some functionalities behind a subscription, you not only a victim anymore, but a part of the problem.
That is not at all a valid reduction of the complaints you are responding to. It's not even close.
30-yd penalty for moving the goalposts.
fidotron · 3h ago
And his direct example, Reason, is Swedish!
gchamonlive · 3h ago
That's what prompted the rest of the research, doesn't need to be American the point stands.
fidotron · 2h ago
So you will continue to buy Swedish?
gchamonlive · 1h ago
Yes. Is that hypocrisy? No, because I'm not advocating for any extreme form of consuming veganism. I'm advocating for a message.
If the message is strong and clear that companies can't employ anti-consumer practices without consequences, then maybe other companies like Reason that operates outside the US will think twice before doing it, even if the laws under which they operate would allow them to.
Why target American products then? It's not accidental. US is by far the largest market and as such has the responsibility to set an example. If we change the example being set that will likely ripple to other markets.
fidotron · 36m ago
The single least logical statement I have ever seen on this forum.
> Is that hypocrisy? No
It's not hypocrisy, it's illogical, and even immoral. You saw something being done by group A and decided you want to punish group B for it.
gchamonlive · 51m ago
You can go about tackling consumerism in many ways. I believe the way that makes the most sense is to start with the largest market. Make it better there, it'll set an example for the rest of the world. Because Americans pride themselves in being the leaders of the free world. Well, that leadership comes with responsibilities, and while yes anti-consumer practices aren't exclusive to US companies, by not being able to care less about their consumers the US is setting a terrible precedent, which we need to address as consumers.
red-iron-pine · 13m ago
literally 100% agit-prop talking points unrelated to the article itself or the parent comment
you're either a bot or are doing a fantastic impression of one
raffael_de · 48m ago
Framework, Pebble, DynaVap, ... those companies deserve to be boycotted just because the are US American?
grues-dinner · 2h ago
BMW also bravely took the PR hit of going first for renting bits of the car to you (like the heated seats).
gchamonlive · 3h ago
This is me ranting and venting after watching too much Louis Rossmann on Youtube, but I think there is some merit in the points I made in the post, hopefully it'll resonate with some of you. I expect this post to be aggravating to some, just because it heavily criticizes liberal democracies with unreasonably week market regulations.
IAmBroom · 12m ago
No, it's aggravating because it uses almost no evidence to blame group A for something groups B, C, and D through Z are guilty of. In fact, the primary evidence presented weirdly isn't from Group A at all.
It's a nonsensical rant, dressed up in proper English format and syntax.
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 · 3h ago
Rossmann is doing some good work bringing awareness to this issue. A lot of people on this forum dabble in a lot of different spheres and I suspect most have been affected by what he describes on a semi-regular basis.
kevin_thibedeau · 3h ago
He is doing some good but he becomes a hypocrite when first arguing for legal frameworks to enforce fair dealing in product access and repairability then turns around and espouses depriving content creators of their income.
kg · 3h ago
I assume this is about adblock. In that case, the PC owner/user's right to control their own hardware takes priority over the content creator's desire to control other people's hardware. Without that fundamental rule, it becomes possible for i.e. John Deere to dictate how you can repair or modify your own equipment, if they allow you to do it at all.
It's unpleasant and I really feel for the content creators whose livelihoods are impacted but we've already seen how bad it is to restrict end users' autonomy.
kevin_thibedeau · 3h ago
Adblock is not an issue. He hawks piracy tools.
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 · 3h ago
Can you elaborate? This is the first time I hear about this part.
IncreasePosts · 2h ago
What piracy tools? I asked gemini (because no way am I sifting through his million hours of video), and all it could come up with is that he talks about a certain DVD player that, I guess, has faulty firmware that bypasses region restrictions. And he has a "garage full of them" (per gemini)
widowlark · 3h ago
Paradox of tolerance
_3u10 · 3h ago
It is strange that so many Brazilians choose to buy products in less regulated and protectionist Paraguay, why would so many Brazilian Drs choose to be educated in a "right-wing narco state". Why is there less inequality in unregulated Paraguay?
What advantage is conveyed to people who travel from Floripa to CDE just to avoid the wonderful consumer protections offered in Brazil? Why would they do such a thing when given the opportunity to vote with their feet?
How does paying twice as much for a car advantage the average Brazilian? Does it make it more affordable for them? Why do "poor" Paraguayans drive Mercedes and BMW when Brazilians choose Renault for the same price?
gchamonlive · 1h ago
Idk and I don't care. One mistake doesn't make another right. You can spend all your free time bashing on Brazilian policies and you'd be mostly right. Consumption is taxed as well as income, the rich pays laughably low taxes and corruption is still rampant with all the congressman taking a bite of public treasury. Still the point stands, Brazil has shown that his laws and regulations work better than US, not only when applying due process to judge and hold polítical figures accountable, but also to protect the consumer after purchase.
GardenLetter27 · 3h ago
This is why I hate tariffs and extreme regulations so much. My Xiaomi vacuum cleaner is the best I've ever owned, but I can't purchase their electric car, and even if I could - it'd cost an extra 40% or so just on the tariffs.
We need a free market with open competition. The best guarantor of rights is having the option to walk away and choose a different provider - in employment, and in services / retail purchases, etc.
toomuchtodo · 1h ago
Would you be willing to share a link to that vacuum cleaner? I would like to leave Dyson behind forever.
throwacct · 2h ago
"Free market with open competition" works when countries play fair. China doesn't play fair. What you propose is to decimate the car industry (your example) and be dependent on foreign actors. Extrapolate that to every industry, and now you have a shell of a country. Late-stage capitalism is equally bad as a "free-for-all" market.
1970-01-01 · 3h ago
>The people are never to blame.
Hold here. They aren't. Immediately letting 'the people' off the hook for blame is a somewhat modern fallacy. These people democratically choose the leader. You can't just 'not blame' them, as a group, for an eventual failure if they consistently choose poorly.
happytoexplain · 2h ago
Yes, but the author doesn't explain why they don't blame citizens. It's reasonable to make the argument that citizens have very little power to fix certain problems. E.g. I haven't had the option of a candidate willing to fix (actually fix) this problem, at any level of government, in my lifetime.
johnisgood · 3h ago
In their defense, they can only choose between this or that, and both of them are quite shitty, in the US.
red-iron-pine · 12m ago
yeah one wanted a public healthcare option, and the other wants to annihilate the global economy and become a dictator.
but they're both the same (rolls eyes)
cruano · 2h ago
> both of them are quite shitty
That's equally as useful as saying jaywalking and mass murder are both crimes
thepryz · 2h ago
Sorry, but I find this to be an excuse.
Voters can hold elected officials accountable by not re-electing politicians, not donating to them, and supporting candidates that will better represent them.
The problem is that most citizens are not civically knowledgeable or engaged which is why we continue to have to choose the lesser of two evils that are often the same in policy.
ryandrake · 2h ago
The choice is between Anti Consumer Jerk #1 and Slightly Less Of An Anti Consumer Jerk #2. One of them is going to be in charge. There is no choice to simply not elect someone, and writing in a non-jerk is unrealistic.
happytoexplain · 2h ago
Shitty in this specific context, arguably.
LadyCailin · 2h ago
Two thirds of American voters took the worst of the options though - either voted for Trump, or didn’t vote at all. It’s a majority problem, and I would totally excuse even third party voters here. But a large chunk of Americans couldn’t even be assed to do the bare minimum!
johnisgood · 2h ago
But we love democracy, right? This is democracy.
yupitsme123 · 3h ago
It's interesting to me that a country that loves consumerism so much doesn't have a pro-consumer movement.
It looks like Ralph Nader led one for a while back in the '70s but it's long dead now.
If someone were to revive such a movement or if some politicians were to attach themselves to it then I think it would be hugely popular.
cogman10 · 3h ago
There are multiple agencies that were created initially to protect consumers. The FTC, CFPB, USDA, FDA, EPA, (arguably the FCC fits here to, but it's a stretch). The issue with each of these agencies is their power has been eroded and redirected over the years. That's because their regulations when done correctly directly and negatively impact monied interests.
Donors hating these agencies means that no political party really fully supports them or funds them fully when they get power.
DFHippie · 2h ago
And now they're all effectively dead, killed by illegal executive actions whose lawsuits have stalled out in the Supreme Court queue. But the employees are already fired and looking for new jobs, so even if the actions are rolled back when SCOTUS finally gets around to it (strategic delay -- they can move like lightning when it suits them), they'll be hollowed out and unable to perform their legislatively mandated duties.
> Donors hating these agencies means that no political party really fully supports them or funds them fully when they get power.
False equivalence benefits bad actors.
nozzlegear · 3h ago
> If someone were to revive such a movement or if some politicians were to attach themselves to it then I think it would be hugely popular.
Senator Elizabeth Warren's whole schtick was, and still is, pro-consumer. She practically built the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with her own two hands. Sadly the CFPB has now been hamstrung by DOGE and the Trump admin; it's been stripped of much of its capacity to enforce its rules, conduct investigations and protect consumers.
kg · 3h ago
Approval rate doesn't seem to be much of a concern for modern western politicians. The current administrations in the US and some other western countries have abysmally low approval ratings and they're still in power. (This is not a value judgment of the administrations or people who voted for them, just an observation).
em-bee · 3h ago
consumerism is for the benefit of the corporations, not the consumer. it's to get people to consume more. being pro-consumer leads to things like warranty, forcing me to make my products last longer which leads to people buying less.
I think Steinbeck’s quip about temporarily embarrassed millionaires has a parallel in how Americans perceive their consumerism: Americans don’t see themselves as a consumer culture, even though we are one.
chneu · 2h ago
Biden was one of the most consumer friendly presidents in a while. He did away with a lot of nonsense fees, forced airlines to be more transparent, among other things.
danishbread · 3h ago
Is this 'don't buy American' or is it 'don't support economies with anti-consumer practices'?
mingus88 · 3h ago
It’s both. From the article
> If I start buying European and they start behaving like the US does now, then this rant will just as easily apply to them.
IAmBroom · 25m ago
And yet... the article includes examples of European companies behaving like this.
BTW, it's not about how the US behaves. It's about how many companies, some of which happen to be US-based, behave.
gchamonlive · 3h ago
It could be about the later, but I'd have to research more to make such a general claim.
m2f2 · 3h ago
I guess it could be extended to any country with similari behavior.
Take the attitude to selling your data at state, country level "just because".
If US citizens love being scr@@d over good for them....
OGEnthusiast · 3h ago
Does this mean not buying from American companies, or things that were made in America? E.g. would this person consider buying a MacBook from Apple that's entirely manufactured in China to be "buying American"?
lucianbr · 3h ago
The author seems to think american companies are anti-consumer. That would certainly include Apple, no matter where a given product is made. Iphones are locked down due to decisions made by Apple execs and employees living and woking in the US, regardless where they are fabricated. It's the lockdown that matters, not where the factory is located.
I don't see why you would even think the geographical location of the manufacturing plant matters.
happytoexplain · 3h ago
Is there a reason you think that might not count? Obviously the point of not buying X is to avoid supporting X for long-term moral and practical reasons, despite the product's convenience/cheapness/quality/whatever.
OGEnthusiast · 3h ago
It was a genuine question, since I imagine it would be difficult to be a tech enthusiast while having your entire personal supply chain be free of any US-based company. Regardless, kudos to people who try.
lucianbr · 3h ago
It does not have to be all or nothing. You can probably aim to reduce the degree of "US-made-ness" of your tech gadgets. I don't know how effective that is, but it's an option that's available.
em-bee · 3h ago
the question is who makes the profit. for apple products most of the profit goes to the US. for others, eg. lenovo most of the profits go to hong kong/china.
maybe you can avoid US components with ARM based computers, or loongson, the chinese CPU.
boh · 3h ago
No shade to the poster but we don't really make much, so not buying American is very easy. Besides tomatoes and apples most people in the US probably don't even own anything made here.
lucianbr · 2h ago
Would you call iPhones chinese and not american? No matter, I think obviously people would consider them american, and importantly, the way they function and respect or trample consumer rights is decided by american citizens.
Maybe the US doesn't make much per se, but it certainly decides and influences much.
nine_k · 2h ago
A ton of people own iPhones, drive Fords and Chevrolets, and buy a lot of local produce. Anybody lucky enough to own a house also own a locally-produced one.
boh · 58m ago
Things not made in America don't count as things made in America.
The most fascinating thing in this self-aware rant is that Reason is still around. I haven’t heard of their DAW in what must be 20 years.
n.b. They were shamelessly anticonsumer all along even in the early days. That’s why we just moved on from them and, to me anyway, they fell into obscurity.
fidotron · 3h ago
He doesn't seem to realize they aren't American either.
I came to the same conclusion years ago. The best appliances and kitchenware I've ever bought were designed (not necessarily made) in countries which have strongly defended return policies. Thinking La Creuset, Breville, Bosch, etc.
In general you get quality from the EU and the UK/Aus/Can/NZ countries where there's "you may return the product at any time for a full refund if it has a fault" type of laws and a consumer agency to help police enforcement (the law is worthless if the consumer has to take a store to court themselves). I'll also give a viewpoint that Japan and SK, like the USA, have fallen pretty far and i don't include them in the above group. If you look it up it appears stores can easily refuse refunds which is a recipe for crap products which explains the absolutely shit Sony and Samsung have been putting out the past decade.
jajuuka · 2h ago
This seems like an empty threat. Okay, so what non-American products do they plan to buy instead? What qualifies something as an American product? Is Apple American because their HQ is there? Are Samsung phones American because they use American Corning Gorilla Glass? Not to mention plenty of other countries have companies that engage in similar practices. As they say, there is no ethical consumption under capitalism.
aelaguiz · 3h ago
The irony of posting this on the literal celebration of upwards mobility and capitalism that is YC is delicious.
_3u10 · 3h ago
I love visiting Brazil, but it’s not like paying 3x the price for an iPhone means you’re less likely to get it stolen in Foz vs CDE (where presumably they bought the phone)
If the writer of the article is here I’m interested in why there’s far more consumer protection southern red states like Santa Catarina vs northern blue states. How come things just don’t get stolen as often there in the Bolsonaro areas?
If your answer is poverty i refer you to CDE vs Foz.
0xbadcafebee · 3h ago
The USA isn't a traditional oligarchy. It does have different levels and kinds of power. Most of them are corporate, but some are purely political or ideological (like Trump's regime). Our oligarchy is more like a collection of oligopolies that all share an interest in the political state and economy. After Trump goes away, they will work towards preventing a single leader from working against their interests again. It's all about soft power.
mrits · 3h ago
In the US we have always at least acted like we try to buy American made. It feels weird that the rest of the world is only now considering where their stuff is coming from.
boh · 3h ago
Who's "we"? The "buy American" crowd has always been super niche and a very small minority.
mingus88 · 3h ago
In my experience, the buy American crowd says one thing but without exception simply buys the cheapest thing always
What they want is for the best deal to be the local deal, but they are not well off enough to actually take a principled stance on it
No comments yet
kevin_thibedeau · 3h ago
Wal-Mart made it a marketing campaign in the 80s. Much of their inventory was US produced with prominent signs all over their stores.
boh · 56m ago
A marketing campaign from 40 years ago doesn't qualify as a predominant culture.
mrits · 2h ago
It was the initiative of the largest retailer. You have had to live in a bubble to not know this.
happytoexplain · 3h ago
The rest of the world absolutely has always had some who consider where their stuff is coming from and some who don't - same as the US.
gchamonlive · 3h ago
I'm not making a point only to buy local. I'm making a point not to buy American today, if things don't improve.
Just want to point out:
* Samsung has been accused of releasing software updates that degrade performance, forcing you to buy newer devices - Samsung is not American
* Brother - Japanese printer maker, I LOVE their printers mind you, but they've released firmware upgrades that prevent or degrade compatibility with third party ink cartridges
* Epson - Also Japanese, also have owned some of their printers, same thing with third party ink cartridges.
I'm sure there's many more companies, not from the US who do equally if not worse evils with software / hardware.
What the author is after isn't American products, just anti-consumerism, which can be impossible to predict mind you. Anyone of any country can do it.
Note that I'm not saying Louis Rossmann is always wrong, nor that I disagree with him on everything, nor that I dislike the good things he does, nor any of the other numerous straw-man arguments that people come up with when you bring up issues with his influencer activity. However, he's the type of influencer who seems to lure in people who let their guard down and stop thinking critically for themselves, which opens the door to articles like this one where the conclusion isn't entirely rational but it feels rational after watching Louis Rossmann talk about it for hours and hours.
Conflating America, the country, with American companies, ignoring all of the non-American companies doing the same practices, and then bringing up a non-American company as the lone supporting example is all consistent with the dynamic I'm describing. The conclusion is assumed to be correct, because it's correct in the world of Louis Rossmann, but putting it to words outside of the YouTube influencer bubble falls apart on any critical thinking.
They said nothing of the sort. You seem to have a penchant for jumping to conclusions. Likewise with conflating a country with a bunch of companies. Cool down, your outrage seems to cloud your thinking.
That is not at all a valid reduction of the complaints you are responding to. It's not even close.
30-yd penalty for moving the goalposts.
If the message is strong and clear that companies can't employ anti-consumer practices without consequences, then maybe other companies like Reason that operates outside the US will think twice before doing it, even if the laws under which they operate would allow them to.
Why target American products then? It's not accidental. US is by far the largest market and as such has the responsibility to set an example. If we change the example being set that will likely ripple to other markets.
> Is that hypocrisy? No
It's not hypocrisy, it's illogical, and even immoral. You saw something being done by group A and decided you want to punish group B for it.
you're either a bot or are doing a fantastic impression of one
It's a nonsensical rant, dressed up in proper English format and syntax.
It's unpleasant and I really feel for the content creators whose livelihoods are impacted but we've already seen how bad it is to restrict end users' autonomy.
What advantage is conveyed to people who travel from Floripa to CDE just to avoid the wonderful consumer protections offered in Brazil? Why would they do such a thing when given the opportunity to vote with their feet?
How does paying twice as much for a car advantage the average Brazilian? Does it make it more affordable for them? Why do "poor" Paraguayans drive Mercedes and BMW when Brazilians choose Renault for the same price?
We need a free market with open competition. The best guarantor of rights is having the option to walk away and choose a different provider - in employment, and in services / retail purchases, etc.
Hold here. They aren't. Immediately letting 'the people' off the hook for blame is a somewhat modern fallacy. These people democratically choose the leader. You can't just 'not blame' them, as a group, for an eventual failure if they consistently choose poorly.
but they're both the same (rolls eyes)
That's equally as useful as saying jaywalking and mass murder are both crimes
Voters can hold elected officials accountable by not re-electing politicians, not donating to them, and supporting candidates that will better represent them.
The problem is that most citizens are not civically knowledgeable or engaged which is why we continue to have to choose the lesser of two evils that are often the same in policy.
It looks like Ralph Nader led one for a while back in the '70s but it's long dead now.
If someone were to revive such a movement or if some politicians were to attach themselves to it then I think it would be hugely popular.
Donors hating these agencies means that no political party really fully supports them or funds them fully when they get power.
> Donors hating these agencies means that no political party really fully supports them or funds them fully when they get power.
False equivalence benefits bad actors.
Senator Elizabeth Warren's whole schtick was, and still is, pro-consumer. She practically built the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with her own two hands. Sadly the CFPB has now been hamstrung by DOGE and the Trump admin; it's been stripped of much of its capacity to enforce its rules, conduct investigations and protect consumers.
> If I start buying European and they start behaving like the US does now, then this rant will just as easily apply to them.
BTW, it's not about how the US behaves. It's about how many companies, some of which happen to be US-based, behave.
Take the attitude to selling your data at state, country level "just because".
If US citizens love being scr@@d over good for them....
I don't see why you would even think the geographical location of the manufacturing plant matters.
maybe you can avoid US components with ARM based computers, or loongson, the chinese CPU.
Maybe the US doesn't make much per se, but it certainly decides and influences much.
n.b. They were shamelessly anticonsumer all along even in the early days. That’s why we just moved on from them and, to me anyway, they fell into obscurity.
https://lemmy.ca/c/boycottus
https://www.starlinghome.io/ shut down today.
In general you get quality from the EU and the UK/Aus/Can/NZ countries where there's "you may return the product at any time for a full refund if it has a fault" type of laws and a consumer agency to help police enforcement (the law is worthless if the consumer has to take a store to court themselves). I'll also give a viewpoint that Japan and SK, like the USA, have fallen pretty far and i don't include them in the above group. If you look it up it appears stores can easily refuse refunds which is a recipe for crap products which explains the absolutely shit Sony and Samsung have been putting out the past decade.
If the writer of the article is here I’m interested in why there’s far more consumer protection southern red states like Santa Catarina vs northern blue states. How come things just don’t get stolen as often there in the Bolsonaro areas?
If your answer is poverty i refer you to CDE vs Foz.
What they want is for the best deal to be the local deal, but they are not well off enough to actually take a principled stance on it
No comments yet