Dear Amazon,
I generally like Amazon — I like the low prices and free shipping. I like the incredible variety of products available. I had planned several purchases in the next couple of months, from a new french press to a new laptop.
But I also like workers, and the American way of life. Which is why I was so disappointed when I heard about conditions in your Lehigh Valley, Pa. warehouse, as detailed in this story by the Morning Call: Inside Amazon's warehouse
Lehigh Valley workers tell of brutal heat, dizzying pace at online retailer.
It shows me several things: First, that Amazon is exploiting its workforce, or, more specifically, exploiting the temporary workforce. It shows that Amazon is engaging in unsafe working conditions, draconian discipline and a general failure of management to treat workers with respect and care.
So, until these problems are resolved, I feel unable to support Amazon in any way, including making my purchases through you. And unfortunately, through the official statements made in the story, it's clear that Amazon can't be trusted to accurately report the conditions it requires of its workers, so I won't be able to shop at Amazon until there is an independent news agency that reports an improvement in conditions at Amazon's warehouses, or when I hear that Amazon's Lehigh Valley warehouse is organized and unionized.
I hope I hear these things soon — as I mentioned, I do appreciate Amazon. But I just can't know that saving me a dollar comes at the cost of heat stroke and brutal conditions. It's not right, and I hope you can understand that.
Josh Steichmann
Showing posts with label work. Show all posts
Showing posts with label work. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Sunday, July 10, 2011
MeFi Mag Issue Four: Work!
MeFi Mag Issue 4:
By MeFi Mag in Entertainment
This issue touches on the theme of work, in various forms. Klangklangston takes a look behind the scenes at the Institute of Erotic Arts and Sciences, msalt discusses the similarities of comedians to Daoist monks, Lutoslawski reveals the torture of man-boobs, iamkimiam is interviewed about "Meffy" vs "Mee-Fai", Brandon Blatcher traces the path Neil Armstrong's journey to be first man on the moon and brina chats with the newest moderator, restless…
Free PDF with sound here! (Due to limitations of print, there is no sound in the Magcloud edition.)
Tell me what you think!
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Doctor, it hurts when I do…
For some reason, when I paste a URL into Word, then hit return twice, it crashes. I don't recall it ever doing this before. I've restarted, repaired permissions, generally puzzled it out, but all I can think is God, MS Word is kinda shitty product.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Multiple topographies
Greg Afinogenov talks about "topographies" versus "biographies" in this blog post, including the following line:
"Though there may be several ways to understand this or that historical figure, the topographer must commit to choosing one interpretation."
In topographer, he's talking about people who write histories of place (at least, I think he is), and Greg's relying on a post-modern (instability of facts) framework to pose his assumption.
But must this be true? Certainly, given an apatite for abstraction, where each option for transience can be met: the author commits to a single interpretation even if that interpretation includes multiple nested interpretations; no matter the depth a deconstructed text is still a text. Even if that text changes, there's a limit to what can be perceived by the audience, etc.
There is, however, no need to restrict this to topographers (a term I like regarding with expansiveness perhaps because I am not a topographer). Those same restrictions are necessary for biographers—even an imagined biographer who tells the story of a life by reliving that life would be necessarily tied to any one given interpretation at any one given time, especially if meta counts.
Which brings me to a challenge: I would like to see stories of place that encompass multiple sets of facts, as much as is possible. I would assume that this is best handled by multimedia, as different media necessarily imply different perspectives due to material constraints. I would assume that this would be parallel and dynamic, making the restrictions on sets of facts more incumbent upon the practical realities of the audience rather than the work itself—it should be impossible to see all of it at once (tangent: unfair art?). To ideally detach itself as much as possible from a single set of facts, it should invite interaction and mutation.
Perhaps selfishly, I'd think this would be best set in Los Angeles, both because I'm here and because it is a city diffidently aware of the difference between portrayal and reality, and one that (even as it exports them) eschews easy narrativization.
"Though there may be several ways to understand this or that historical figure, the topographer must commit to choosing one interpretation."
In topographer, he's talking about people who write histories of place (at least, I think he is), and Greg's relying on a post-modern (instability of facts) framework to pose his assumption.
But must this be true? Certainly, given an apatite for abstraction, where each option for transience can be met: the author commits to a single interpretation even if that interpretation includes multiple nested interpretations; no matter the depth a deconstructed text is still a text. Even if that text changes, there's a limit to what can be perceived by the audience, etc.
There is, however, no need to restrict this to topographers (a term I like regarding with expansiveness perhaps because I am not a topographer). Those same restrictions are necessary for biographers—even an imagined biographer who tells the story of a life by reliving that life would be necessarily tied to any one given interpretation at any one given time, especially if meta counts.
Which brings me to a challenge: I would like to see stories of place that encompass multiple sets of facts, as much as is possible. I would assume that this is best handled by multimedia, as different media necessarily imply different perspectives due to material constraints. I would assume that this would be parallel and dynamic, making the restrictions on sets of facts more incumbent upon the practical realities of the audience rather than the work itself—it should be impossible to see all of it at once (tangent: unfair art?). To ideally detach itself as much as possible from a single set of facts, it should invite interaction and mutation.
Perhaps selfishly, I'd think this would be best set in Los Angeles, both because I'm here and because it is a city diffidently aware of the difference between portrayal and reality, and one that (even as it exports them) eschews easy narrativization.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
From Tuesday
Phone rings.
Josh: Hi, this is Josh at Barely Legal.
Caller: (high, nasal voice) Hi. I'm looking for a doll with parts.
J: A doll with parts?
C: Yeah, a doll with all the parts. A little one.
J: Like a GI Joe?
C: No, with parts.
J: GI Joe has parts.
C: No, like all the parts. Organs.
J: Oh, yeah, like one of those transparent dolls, you know, you take 'em apart and they got intestines and hearts.
C: No, no, I already got one of them. No, like a little statue. You know where I can get one?
J: Maybe look on the internet?
C: I can't go to the internet. I need a statue.
J: You mean, like David?
C: Yeah, like David.
J: Oh, you need to call the Uffizi in Florence. They've got the David.
C: How big is it?
J: I dunno. About eight feet.
C: I need a little one.
J: They got little ones too. You know, for tourists.
C: That's in Italy?
J: Yeah, Florence in Italy.
C: I can't call Italy.
J: Maybe you can go to your library. They got pictures of David there.
C: Yeah, I can't go to the library. I'm in New York. No, I need a doll here.
J: You tried Times Square?
C: Where in Times Square?
J: I dunno. Never been there.
C: What about in California? That's where you are, right?
J: I don't know, I never bought a statue.
C: No, what about a doll.
J: Barbie?
C: Yeah, like Barbie, but a man.
J: Oh, you mean Ken! Ken's the boy version of Barbie.
C: Yeah, but with the parts.
J: You mean outfits?
C: No, no, all the parts. Where can I get one with all the parts?
J: I dunno. Hasbro?
C: Hasbro?
J: Yeah, I think they make Barbie.
C: No, look, I saw this statue once, it had all its organs, right?
J: Where'd you see it?
C: Somebody in my family had it.
J: Oh, you should ask them then.
C: No, but they're gone.
J: Where did they go? Do they have a cell phone?
C: They're dead.
J: Oh, then you're gonna have to check the will.
C: Look, no, that doll, that doll is gone.
J: Where do you think they got it?
C: I don't know. That's why I'm asking you. Look…
J: Yeah?
C: I got this other doll, he's got his parts. He's throwing a discus. I want this other doll to put next to him.
J: A discus? That's in the Olympics.
C: Yeah, OK. But he's got all his parts.
J: Right. You should try the Olympics. Maybe get a guy with a javelin.
C: They got statues?
J: Why not? You watch the Olympics?
C: No.
J: It was pretty good. It was in China this time.
C: Yeah, yeah, I heard that. Now…
J: Beijing. It was on NBC.
C: I heard that. But what I'm really asking about is a doll.
J: I bet they got Olympic dolls.
C: Where?
J: I dunno. Toys 'R Us?
C: You think they got Olympic dolls there with all the parts?
J: Yeah, with the javelin and the discus, sure.
C: No, like, their other parts…
J: Olympics! Glad I could help. (hangs up)
Josh: Hi, this is Josh at Barely Legal.
Caller: (high, nasal voice) Hi. I'm looking for a doll with parts.
J: A doll with parts?
C: Yeah, a doll with all the parts. A little one.
J: Like a GI Joe?
C: No, with parts.
J: GI Joe has parts.
C: No, like all the parts. Organs.
J: Oh, yeah, like one of those transparent dolls, you know, you take 'em apart and they got intestines and hearts.
C: No, no, I already got one of them. No, like a little statue. You know where I can get one?
J: Maybe look on the internet?
C: I can't go to the internet. I need a statue.
J: You mean, like David?
C: Yeah, like David.
J: Oh, you need to call the Uffizi in Florence. They've got the David.
C: How big is it?
J: I dunno. About eight feet.
C: I need a little one.
J: They got little ones too. You know, for tourists.
C: That's in Italy?
J: Yeah, Florence in Italy.
C: I can't call Italy.
J: Maybe you can go to your library. They got pictures of David there.
C: Yeah, I can't go to the library. I'm in New York. No, I need a doll here.
J: You tried Times Square?
C: Where in Times Square?
J: I dunno. Never been there.
C: What about in California? That's where you are, right?
J: I don't know, I never bought a statue.
C: No, what about a doll.
J: Barbie?
C: Yeah, like Barbie, but a man.
J: Oh, you mean Ken! Ken's the boy version of Barbie.
C: Yeah, but with the parts.
J: You mean outfits?
C: No, no, all the parts. Where can I get one with all the parts?
J: I dunno. Hasbro?
C: Hasbro?
J: Yeah, I think they make Barbie.
C: No, look, I saw this statue once, it had all its organs, right?
J: Where'd you see it?
C: Somebody in my family had it.
J: Oh, you should ask them then.
C: No, but they're gone.
J: Where did they go? Do they have a cell phone?
C: They're dead.
J: Oh, then you're gonna have to check the will.
C: Look, no, that doll, that doll is gone.
J: Where do you think they got it?
C: I don't know. That's why I'm asking you. Look…
J: Yeah?
C: I got this other doll, he's got his parts. He's throwing a discus. I want this other doll to put next to him.
J: A discus? That's in the Olympics.
C: Yeah, OK. But he's got all his parts.
J: Right. You should try the Olympics. Maybe get a guy with a javelin.
C: They got statues?
J: Why not? You watch the Olympics?
C: No.
J: It was pretty good. It was in China this time.
C: Yeah, yeah, I heard that. Now…
J: Beijing. It was on NBC.
C: I heard that. But what I'm really asking about is a doll.
J: I bet they got Olympic dolls.
C: Where?
J: I dunno. Toys 'R Us?
C: You think they got Olympic dolls there with all the parts?
J: Yeah, with the javelin and the discus, sure.
C: No, like, their other parts…
J: Olympics! Glad I could help. (hangs up)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)