Hacker News Reader

Comment by cryptoz | Hacker News Reader

> I've never had a fake product

Are you really certain about that? The fakes are so good sometimes I don't notice for a year or two. There are so many ways of faking different products, and the fakers are getting really really really good at making the product seem real.

Have you done a few hours of searching and testing for everything you've bought? This is what it takes, IMO, to feel some level of confidence in an Amazon (US) product being 'real'. The levels of suspicion never really go away either - since I've been duped by probably a dozen products at least, that have turned out to be fake, I'm highly suspicious of any Amazon purchase.

It's been a couple years since I bought anything from there. Too much stress worrying about authenticity to make it worth it.

View on HN

As certain as I can be of any store purchase. Nothing I've bought from Amazon has been substandard quality and it's pretty much all lasted as well as I'd expect. I've had much better luck with Amazon than with local stores. If the fakes are literally indistinguishable, it's possible I've had some, but then I guess it makes little difference to me.

As far as research goes, if it's expensive, I put some research in if it's a product or brand I've never used before, but I never specifically look to see if it's a fake product on Amazon.

For reference, I spend about £5k a year at Amazon UK. Nearly all my experiences have been positive apart from the occasional damage in transit.

I'm with you on never having had a fake (at least, echo your 'sure as I could ever be') - closest was a Marantz microphone that curiously identifies as a Blue Snowball, but I suspect they're probably just both farmed out to the same place and got mixed up or it always says Blue, or they're exactly the same underneath the shell. They're in the same price bracket anyway so not really my loss or any reason to fake that.

What I have found though is that the quality of search results, the experience of using the site, has seriously deteriorated in the last two or three years. It's like AliExpress or eBay now.

I used to read other countries' Amazon users (e.g. .com) complain about this and think what are you talking about it's great, but yeah, now... I still get as good stuff from Amazon because that's what I buy, I just have to wade through a lot of crap to get it.

> Marantz microphone that curiously identifies as a Blue Snowball

If you don’t consider that a sign of a fake product, I don’t think you’re being objective. Fake products put significant effort into looking like real products, many times you need to take them apart to find the differences.

Some people just aren't concerned with brand names. If it looks and works like it's supposed to, and it didn't cost any more money, then what's the problem?

Certainly if it's 'really' a Blue Snowball rather than a Marantz MPM-1000U, I don't care, they're in the same price bracket from two respected brands. (I only chose between them on the basis that the Snowball was slightly more expensive at the time I ordered and aesthetically I preferred the Marantz. So really, if it were internally a Snowball and that was different, it would be a win?)

To be fair though it's not as clear as I was expecting, but I'm no expert so not really set up to do any proper testing, the room its in is probably acoustically awful anyway, etc. It's certainly not awful even if it isn't what it says it is, it's several steps up from the dirt cheap 'Tonor' branded and unashemedly 'Chinesium' thing I used before it.

The great thing about Amazon though is that after this thread I contacted support (way out of return period) and they've shipped a replacement. I'll see if it's the same; if it is, of course that doesn't prove anything, but I'll be very interested if it does seem (more - still wouldn't know for sure of course) real to see what the differences are in packaging/construction/printing etc.

Just to follow up on that, replacement arrived, ~this one identifies as 'USB Microphone'. Seems otherwise~ [edit: I mis-remembered which way around it was, they're both 'USB Microphone' on macOS, and both 'Blue Snowball' on Linux] identical, I think my assumption is still that both products are manufactured (genuinely) by the same factory, and the design even perhaps farmed out so they really are identical on the inside, but either way just flashed with the wrong ID.

Both of these two are identical inside too, same board revision even. (And not every penny pinched like you would if you were faking - gloss black solder mask, as well as on a second PCB whose only job is keeping wires tidy and displaying a silk screened revision number.)

[edit: Further to edit above, it's actually 'C-Media Electronics, Inc. Blue Snowball', and the main chip is this one: https://www.cmedia.com.tw/applications/microphone/CM6327A so presumably both microphones use it and the same assembly house (whether the same design or not) and the EEPROMs' manufacturer/product strings are either getting mixed up or all Blue, whether by mistake or assembler realised they could get paid double to flash once.]

Hm, is your thinking that it's unrelated to either and just clumsily faked by someone who fakes both?

That... yeah, good point. I don't know why that didn't occur to me before. (I was previously thinking they probably just genuninely use some same chips, or even both brands farm it out to the same shop, and both genuine microphones are the exactly same, just differently packaged.)

Just chiming in with basically the same experience: never had anything I could tell was fake, everything was pretty much what I expected for the price, and Amazon search is a complete and utter shitshow of uselessness.

For computer equipment, I shop NewEgg because their search rules. I wish there was a NewEgg for other stuff. I'm more than happy to pay more and wait a few days extra to have a search that doesn't suck.

Sadly, both NewEgg and BestBuy are "marketplaces" now, and amazon sellers have set up shop there too. They're smaller, so I hope there's a little better QA, but I'm not optimistic for their future

I use Amazon UK and have had very mixed experiences with finding and purchasing goods.

The site is increasingly swamped with low-quality goods sourced from AliBaba or AliExpress. This is easily verified by searching for a item and seeing the same product sold under a different "brand name" (with the same generic product photos). These "drop-shipping" businesses dominate many product categories.

Even with books, Amazon's print-on-demand service means that search results are swamped with "low-content or no content" titles (essentially notebooks, diaries, planners etc). These "no content" titles often slap an unrelated title on the cover for what is simply a empty notebook (e.g. "JavaScript notebook"). The keyword in the title is there to gain a higher position in Amazon's broken search.

The things described above are easily discovered online. YouTube has hundreds of "drop-shipping" videos and videos of publishing "no content" books. These videos are full of advice on how to manipulate Amazon listings using various techniques.

Quite simply, Amazon is now an untamed mess of an online store. But with enough customers (and growing) it is unlikely anything will change.

I just wanted to add to this --fakes can be near perfect in appearance. A number of years ago Black Diamond had to put out an advisory on one of their pieces of mountain climbing gear because someone was making an exact replica of their climbing hardware...but with substandard metal.

Everything matched, with laser cut serial numbers and everything. The only way they could ensure it was real was by material testing, or known purchase from an authorized dealer.

Years ago there was a decent chance amazon had the real thing, but now I'd avoid anything that can potentially kill you

Sounds like they outsourced their production and their producer ran extra shifts on the side.

Or whomever setup their plant setup an extra plant on the side.

Though I increasingly suspect any bad batch gets labelled as a counterfeit to avoid liability.

Does it matter if it works for a year or two? While meanwhile in the age of planned obsolescence the originals don't work any longer, because of 'warranty period optimised design', or other artificial factors like no (security)-updates, for instance.

If the fake is almost real, does it really matter?

It definitely matters. Watch some of the teardowns of power adapters on YouTube: they look and work almost identically and you’d likely never tell the difference, but one is much more likely to set your house on fire if it malfunctions.

Admittedly one could argue that this is the reason we have insurance. I don't know that my Apple X won't light my house on fire, as opposed to my knock off Snapple X.

That's what the UL or CE mark is for

Are you aware that at least CE is 'self certification' ?

Only when a case goes to court, it will be determined if the certification was rightful or not.

Too bad so many of those marks are fake on Amazon.

Unfortunately I can't comment below this point, in the thread I started.

You're making the point I'm making. While I don't (to the best of my knowledge) purchase counterfeit items, I don't pretend that certification is anything other than certification. Hopefully certification comes with standards, and aren't self-reporting... but that's not always the case.

JFYI, there is CE and C E.

https://support.ce-check.eu/hc/en-us/articles/360008642600-H...

jaclaz, that's interesting, but Wikipedia alleges it to be somewhat of an urban legend:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CE_marking#%22China_Export%22

Disagree, because I've got a hand full of these from different brands in operation right now. One even from the major CPE-equipment manufacturer in Germany. I know because they looked 'fishy' to me when they arrived, and I researched into that.

I opend some of them non-destructively to check them out, and deemed them sufficient. They barely get warm at all.

Nonetheless I put them in some closed rack where they only could produce some stink, but no fire.

I'm too lazy to unplug them right now to upload photos to Imgur, or such, because it would disrupt some services.

Anyways, no urban legend. Just the usual bureaucratic disconnect from reality, saying otherwise.

Meanwhile another bureaucratic entity, the german customs really likes to hassle you because of exactly that sh..! :-)

edit: Some of them in continous operation for just over a decade, some others about 5 to 6 years, YMMV. (shrug)

That's just a joke that arises from self-certifying 'CE', like 'QC passed' it's just a label that doesn't mean anything but makes some consumers feel good, just because you get used to seeing it and it looks like it must be good even if (or only if) you dont actually know what it means.

Yeah, I got some adapters from aliexpress seller that were basically re-passed burned down things with some major components obviously replaced (like the main high voltage capacitor) and everything essential from protection circuitry, to noise filtration stripped down and removed, fuse replaced by a wire, some components literally hanging by a thread (broken off part of PCB replaced just by non-isolated wires hanging in space).

Stuff my nightmares are made of now. Anyway, I always open all power adapters/supplies I buy from there, because my original education is EE, so I never used these. But the idea that some people are using such things is quite scary.

Not to poo poo on aliexpress itself. There are some exceptional quality sellers and products to be found there. You just have to know how to find them.

Uch. That's pretty much why I never trust any other adapter than the one which came with my phone. It can burn your house down while really damaging your device.

Methinks if your house burned down, damage to some device is irrelevant.

Mpow, mentioned as a culprit in the article, actually makes good chi-fi earbuds. They’re highly rated in terms of bang for your buck, and I’ve had good experience with them. But, if you’re not actively reading random chi-fi discord servers for recommendations, you’ll probably never see companies like that without them resorting to crazy amazon tactics.

If you care about getting the real deal instead of the cheap knock-off version, doesn't Amazon have marked official pages for those vendors?

Amazon Fulfillment can cause even that to go wrong.

https://www.redpoints.com/blog/amazon-commingled-inventory-m...

First off it errodes the reputation of the real product. Fakes are never as good, and the real company will have to deal with people trying to return fakes as well as bad reviews.

I'd also say it absolutely matters depending on the class of product -since they are saving money somewhere; so by logic if the outside looks the same, they skimped on the insides.

Electronics can kill you, makeup can contain toxic chemicals, toys with lead, or parts that break too easy and hurt the user...

Not the least, fake books are just theft from the author, who probably isn't getting the best deal from their publisher in the first place. So only a shitty person would be cool knowing their book was just a really good fake.

If you write a book, offer it for sale, I copy the book, offer it for sale, and someone buys the book from me who would otherwise have bought from you, that seems to me that I’ve stolen income from you in 3 steps instead of one.

If you design and sell a product without patenting it, and I copy the design and sell a competing product, have I stolen from you?

The only difference between the two scenarios is that one involves copyright infringement. Theft means a possession was taken. Potential income is not a possession. There are various ways to describe the harm ("damages" comes to mind) but "theft" isn't among them.

Well if you did patent it, it's stolen. The equivalent for books is copyright laws, so if the work is protected copyright then yes, you've stolen.

And theft is defined as stealing, which has "to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully" which applies fully here so...

You can nit pick definitions all day, but you'll find most people would consider this theft, as you're depriving the artist of the rights to their creation. I really feel people who want to argue the other way are a stain on this earth, because you're so happy to defend it...it's just mental gymnastics to a pathetic argument

I don't mean to nit pick, but it's seems like the only way to iron this out. "Theft is defined as stealing" isn't right. Rather: theft is defined as stealing property (or services). Property means real possessions in this context, not intangibles like IP.

A person can steal an idea (or market share) and it wouldn't make them a thief.

The fact that a victim of copyright infringement may end up disadvantaged to the exact same extent as if they were a victim of theft does not magically equate the two, even if the two involve stealing.

It is almost as if the efforts by the RIAA et al ( framing copying as stealing, would you steal a car? ) have worked.

My comment is in the red.

Patents in their current incarnation are theft.

Lemme give an example of how I see this:

I have some idea to do something in a certain way, and because of that I declare it forbidden to everyone else to do it the same way, except they pay me something to be allowed to do it that way.

Wouldn't you think of something like F! How dare he/she/it/whatever?

> Theft means a possession was taken.

Usually, but not always, which is why theft of electricity is a thing.

Unlike ideas and other intangibles that are subject to trivial copying, electricity falls into the realm of the physical world. Also, theft of services is an established type of theft along with theft of property.

What's being stolen in theft of electricity? The electrons or the holes?

Service. This question "is a copy equivalent and trivial to create?" is a pretty good way to understand the line in the sand regarding what stuff is subject to copyright infringement versus theft. We have theft of property and theft of service. We do not have theft of trivially copyable stuff because we have copyright infringement instead for that case.

Paintings, manuscripts, etc. are subject to theft because they are nonfungible. The content itself is subject to copyright because the copies are fungible.

Words can be used as metaphor.

Did it ever occur to you that some products are just generic, and the only thing the off-brands/off-labels skimped on is the marketing/advertisement, and maybe development costs? While meanwhile the brands themselves doing the same, because the marketing costs have to come from somewhere? Not to mention planned obsolescence...

If you are buying for instance safety gear such as belay devices, then hell yeah it matters.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com