Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip - <AUTHOR> https://www.workingwa.org/instacart-eighty-cents <comment><USER3> There's a related blog post up on Medium by this same group (Working Washington) where they placed the same order, once with tip and once without, so people could directly compare.

From my perspective Instacart is stealing from its customers and workers by doing this. I'm a huge fan of instacart (my fiance and I use it regularly), but this is definitely going to push me away from the platform. At a minimum I'm going to be tipping in cash.

[https://medium.com/@workingwa/instacart-heres- our-22-cents-n...](https://medium.com/@workingwa/instacart-heres-our-22-cents- no-more-tip-theft-low-pay-and-black-box-pay-algorithms-8ff1d7c6b66)

<comment><USER4> > From my perspective Instacart is stealing from its customers and workers by > doing this.

This is 100% wage theft.

<comment><USER5> It will not matter. Washington state law does not apply. The sovereign state of Washington laws are superseded and invalidated by mandatory binding arbitration. The rights set out in the State of Washington's constitution do not apply, for they are superceded and ignored by mandatory binding arbitration.

Any dispute will go to a monkey court instead.

<comment><USER6> Washington state law certainly does apply. The _state_ did not sign a mandatory binding arbitration agreement. The employee/contractor may not have the right to bring suit against Instacart, but the state maintains that right.

Thought experiment: could Instacart assault, kidnap, or murder a delivery driver and claim that arbitration is the only venue for redress?

<comment><USER7> And even then, the worker does have the right to petition the court to review the clause itself. So the worker can still sue with the knowledge that it will be thrown out if the judge decides to uphold the arbitration clause.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> B-Con > That's right: the customer's tip doesn't get added to the worker's check — > it just gets deducted from what Instacart pays. In other words, up-front > tips go to Instacart, not to the worker.

My understanding is that the Fair Labor Standards Act does not allow for employers to whithold tips.[0]

Gratuity/tip is a legally recognized concept. You can't just throw the word in your app and do what you want with the money it generates. There are legal expectations around how the money goes from the customer to the worker.

[0] [https://www.ramoslaw.com/is-your-employer-committing-wage- th...](https://www.ramoslaw.com/is-your-employer-committing-wage-theft-by- withholding-your-tips/)

[edit] Added "not"

<comment><USER8> Instacart delivery workers are classified as independent contractors, which allows the company to flout basic labor laws. This is commonplace in digital age 'gig economy' jobs, but dates back to the early days of food delivery - e.g., most pizza delivery drivers are classified as independent contractors.

That having been said, the concept of defining contractor wages in relation to customer tips is new to me. I could see a legal argument being made in the employer's favor if the worker gave due consent to the transaction.

The idea here would be: Instacart states somewhere on the order prior to pickup 'if you choose to accept this order, you will receive $10, of which $.80 will come from us.' Since the delivery worker isn't running a 'shift' as an 'employee,' but just coincidentally happens to be running Instacart orders for 10 hours straight, this counts as one of many transactions that they've accepted and hence waived the legal right to complain about.

If this legal fiction sounds absurd to you, you're not alone.

<comment><USER9> I would agree, if the app didn't say "tip for delivery person" instead of "tip for instacart" or something maybe more ambiguous like "tip." Take a look at the screenshots of their app being discussed here: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/bizcarson/2018/04/24/instacart-...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/bizcarson/2018/04/24/instacart- adds-tipping-back/#6b01149b74e8)

<comment><USER10> Are you sure those aren't the upcoming changes? There's another older screenshot further down that has more ambiguous wording.

Edit: welp, even that says it 100% goes to the person doing the shopping. Gross.

<comment><USER11> Insidious, right? 100% of the tip technically does go to your shopper.

Welcome to the world of 'tipped wages'. In my state, every paycheck, the first $520 worth of tips effectively goes straight to your employer for the purposes of paying your minimum wage and then you can have whatever is left over.

<comment><USER12> What's more, this article is made by employees from Washington state, where they don't even have a separate tipped minimum wage.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> More evidence as to why tipping culture needs to die. Tipping fundamentally takes away the responsibility of paying someone for their work from the employer to the customer. In what other business context do I pay an employee of a company I deal with directly outside of the service industry where tipping is common? Wages are a cost of doing business. Pay the worker enough. If you want to still provide them an incentive to work hard, offer them incentive plans! Bring up your prices to reflect the true cost of your product or service. It's time to abolish tips.

<comment><USER14> Well it should start with you right? Are you willing to never tip again in your entire life? If so, let us know how it goes (or maybe is going?)

Or, alternatively, maybe you don't live in a country with a tipping culture. And if so, then tipping doesn't really affect you.

People like to tip. I like to tip. Waiters and waitresses like to be tipped. My wife used to work as a waitress and would clear over $300 a night in tips alone. It's only a small minority of people who are against it.

<comment><USER15> It does. Most people I know in SF, including me, don't tip. Waiters here are way more used to it and don't necessarily expect it.

<comment><USER16> You are simply wrong. It's trivially easy to disprove your several comments about SF tipping culture with a few google searches.

Don't confuse the fact that nobody has confronted you for the idea that waiters don't expect you to tip them.

<comment><USER17> I live in SF. I don't tip, most of my acquaintances don't tip either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> It's funny (to me, anyway) that this sort of things affects only America (and I guess Canada?) This odd culture you have there of tipping and how it's so tightly integrated into your society.

As a non-American I had to read the article a few times to understand what the problem was - I thought this was just how tipping worked in the US.

I always read of service workers who only manage to "stay afloat" by the tips they earn, this seems to be almost the same thing, but reading it again I can see it isn't.

Here in NZ there is sometimes a "tip jar" at the counter of a cafe where you might throw in a coin or two (say $1 or $2) as a way of thanking the staff overall. High end restaurants will also offer a place for you to add a tip if you feel you got exceptional service, but there's also no hard feeling or death stares if you don't put anything there.

I hope tipping dies in the US and people get paid fairly regardless. But then you have bigger problems to solve first of all :)

<comment><USER19> I have moved to the US not that recently.

The tipping system still baffles me (and I never know when I am supposed to tip or not .. )

From what I gathered, it comes from the prohibition as a way to supplement hotels and restaurants personnel wages (since they were making less in that context).

Why it persisted to nowadays and has been extended to many service works baffles me to no end.

Taxes are also added at checkout when you buy e.g. groceries, so it seems pretty cultural to have a very opaque 'what you pay' system.

<comment><USER20> We have also obfuscated what you make. Combined its very strange.

You could tell someone they get a new job paying $30/hour and you are selling them this house for $10/hour. After everything is said and done, those numbers could be the same... what?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Isn't this similar to what DoorDash (a YC company) is doing? [https://notipdoordash.com](https://notipdoordash.com)

These sorts of stories confirm my feelings about tipping that I've had all along: tipping is just a way to subsidize employers by pitting employees against customers and guilt-tripping the latter.

Follow-up update: Aren't all the gig economy start-ups (Uber/Uber Eats, Lyft, Caviar, Eat24/Yelp, Fiverr etc.) potentially doing the same thing? They are probably exploiting the same loop-hole in whatever set of laws. It might be just a UI update, but I remember seeing a message of the form "our drivers get 100% of their tips" in Uber Eats just yesterday, which is sort of like saying "we are following the law about tips".

<comment><USER22> Uber/UberEats drivers get 100% of every tip, that is completely outside the equation for their pay.

<comment><USER21> Sorry, that's what I meant: an independent contractor getting 100% of their tips doesn't mean Uber/UberEats hasn't adjusted the amount they pay the contractor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I was a huge user of Instacart 2 years ago when my nearest grocery store turned into one of the busiest Whole Foods in my city that I didn't enjoy dealing with.

The way they keep working to create opaqueness around their tipping to the point that last year Drivers were handing out pamphlets explaining how to remove the "Service Fee" (which nobody but Instacart gets) to tip the drivers was a huge red flag. Removing the service fee was on a 2nd page you had to go to and by default I believe was 10% of your order. If you've never used Instacart the groceries in my experience have been quite a bit more expensive than they'd be in stores so they're making revenue on that end already.

I started using them a bit again this year and now there's only a "Driver Tip" section with I believe a hard locked in service fee. Does the shopper get the tip as well? Is the driver the shopper as well now? In my situation the shopper is doing FAR more work than the driver. I want to tip the people well because I know Instacart doesn't pay well, but I don't want to give a $26 tip for $130 in groceries (which is usually 3-4 bags) going to the person who only spent 10 minutes in a car to drop my groceries off at my front door (and Instacart drivers never read the Delivery notes, I've had to walk out and walk them over to me each time last year that I ordered).

Is the tip split between the shopper and the driver? It only says "Driver Tip".

Everything just seems to be disgustingly opaque with this company and I really do not feel right even using it anymore so I've used it incredibly sparingly (maybe 3 times last year) as of late.

edit: I just checked, there's an info icon and it says 100% of the tip goes to the driver. So should I not tip based on the entire process of shopping and delivery? I don't even want to use this app anymore because I shouldn't have to stop and waste time considering these things.

This company just screams deceptive to me. Guess I'll be done with it.

<comment><USER24> 100% of the tip goes to the driver yes. but, that statement is completely compatible with instacart changing how much they pay their driver for that delivery down to 80 cents. I hope this was a mistake on the part of instacart.

<comment><USER25> > I hope this was a mistake on the part of instacart.

According to the screenshot of Instacart's email, they confirmed this is accurate and was most definitely not a mistake. And according to the article, Instacart has doubled-down instead of apologizing.

<comment><USER24> Come to think of it their aggressive upselling techniques always left a bad taste in my mouth. I do like the service but they really need to up their pay for their drivers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Wow. I'm cancelling my instacart account immediately. They've made so many mistakes in the past, but I liked their app. But this crosses the line by a mile. When I give someone a tip, it's not because I chose to pay more for an order just for fun, it's because I want the worker to get extra. They don't get to charge me a service fee, and ask me to tip, and then not give the worker my service fee. That's just crazy.

<comment><USER27> I'm also pretty sure that they say that 100% of the tip goes to the driver when you place an order.

<comment><USER28> They probably think the money is fungible.

"We gave the driver 100% of the $10 from _your_ tip, and withheld _our_ $10 from their wages."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Instacart started out by secretly marking up groceries. Once that game was played out, it seems they started secretly marking down employee (oh sorry, contractor) wages

<comment><USER30> Frankly I can't fathom how this company is still in business. I live in the bay area and I don't know a single person who's ever used it or mentions it.

<comment><USER31> I've not really understood the point of grocery delivery other than in cities where car ownership is uncommon. And even there, you can rent a Zipcar once a quarter to stock up on bulky or heavy items (toiler paper, bags of rice or flour etc.) That's what I did when I was a car-less student. For other groceries, especially produce, I prefer to pick stuff out myself. And going to the store myself often exposes me to new products that I would not otherwise have learned about.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Hi. I'm a Fast Company reporter, and we've been investigating this and many other issues for about a week, including asking Instacart to explain them all. Stay tuned for a full report this week or early next. Thanks, Sean Captain @seancaptain

<comment><USER33> Would love to see the article expanded on with a legal analysis of the situation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I used to work for a delivery company with this same pay structure. This is garbage and its taking advantage of young people who are looking for jobs.

<comment><USER35> Serious question: if somebody knows that a job like this is such a ripoff (even if the rates aren't advertised, you _will_ find out soon enough, if via stories like this), why would somebody take a job like this?

<comment><USER36> Not everyone is a software developer with companies fighting over them. Some really don't have options, and the choice is either get no income and be unable to pay your bills, or get screwed over but get some money to pay the bills.

<comment><USER37> > Some really don't have options.

Unfortunately, in this economy, it's probably more accurate to say "most people really don't have options" rather than "some"

<comment><USER38> The job market is as strong as it has been in the past ~30+ years?

<comment><USER39> It's important to keep in mind that a low unemployment rate does not say anything about the overall quality of jobs in the market.

So while it's a 'strong market' in the sense that 'unemployment is low', it could also be examined from another angle. Which is the rise of the gig economy giving people a lot of opportunities for work, but work that comes at a cost of being heavily exploited like with Instacart. Nor does it say anything about whether or not people are holding full time vs part time jobs or the stagnant wage issues.

<comment><USER37> yes. "unemployment is low" is a measure of the job market. we can say it's "strong" by that measure. but, as you say, when we look at the actual jobs there's a helluva lot of retail and other low wage, limited benefit positions, positions whose salaries have lagged far behind the skyrocketing costs of health care and higher education.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Their help section specifically states :

"Shoppers appreciate tips as a way of recognizing great service and 100% of your tip goes directly to the shopper delivering your order. For more information about tipping, follow this link."

Source: [https://www.instacart.com/help/section/200761924#213895126](https://www.instacart.com/help/section/200761924#213895126) payment/service fee section

If confirmed this is straight out lying to your customers

<comment><USER41> What you quoted is not a lie. 100% of the tip is going to the shopper. The problem is they are not paying the shopper on top of the tip.

<comment><USER42> I am sure you are being humorous, but anyway, the FTC says:

"When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it's on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence. The Federal Trade Commission enforces these truth-in-advertising laws, and it applies the same standards no matter where an ad appears – in newspapers and magazines, online, in the mail, or on billboards or buses."

and:

"Statements that are literally true may be deceptive if they leave a misleading impression".

Unfortunately, the first step the FTC takes _if they even get around to it_ is to direct the advertiser to remove such statements. No fines are levied if the advertiser complies with this request.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Why doesn't the headline read "Instacart (YC S12)"?

<comment> basil-rash They don't add that to companies most people will already recognize:

Airbnb: [https://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+ai...](https://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+airbnb)

Stripe: [https://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+st...](https://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+stripe)

Cruise: [https://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+cr...](https://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+cruise)

etc.

<comment><USER44> "Most people" surely doesn't apply here. I'd never heard of them, much less knew they were YC.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> I have never understood the tipping concept.

Just pay your workers minimum wages at least and make tipping optional.

I shouldn't have to tip the "employees" just because a company can get away without paying even minimum wage to its "employees".

There is something seriously broken with the whole tipping thing.

<comment><USER13> Or increase the cost of your product or service and offer incentives to employees after you've already raised their wages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> DoorDash does the same thing of "stealing" tips. Either you should tip in cash or not at all.

<comment><USER47> I want the worker to receive 100% of the tip as much as anyone.

But does anyone else find it obnoxious that all these digital services exist, often starting out with no tip straight pricing, then tipping re-appears, and then you suddenly need physical cash to morally use the service at all?

Obviously workers should get fairly compensated. The problem is tipping culture itself, just set a price that customers are willing to pay and workers can enjoy a reasonable standard of living.

Plus the whole tipping thing is extremely inconsistent. Floral delivery? No tip. Pizza delivery? Tip. Some brands support credit card tipping, others don't, and even the ones that do you have to research how much using it hurts the employee...

The US needs law changes that outlaw tipping. It will be culturally painful while we adapt but once we do both workers and customers will be better for it.

<comment><USER48> > The US needs law changes that outlaw tipping.

No, it just needs to not treat workers that might receive tips differently: they should have he same minimum wages as other workers and tips should not count as compensation by the employer satisfying minimum wage mandates.

Private employers might then wish to prohibit employees accepting tips (since it no longer benefits the employer as it does now for the worker to be classes as "tipped"), for similar reasons to those for which public employers already do.

EDIT: And we need better enforcement (and possibly slight changes to the basic rules) against mischaracterization of employees as contractors, which is most of the problem in this case.

<comment><USER49> > No, it just needs to not treat workers that might receive tips differently: > they should have he same minimum wages as other workers and tips should not > count as compensation by the employer satisfying minimum wage mandates.

Now they're getting minimum wage and I still feel the need to tip. That doesn't fix the problem unless we also make major changes to the minimum wage.

> Private employers might then wish to prohibit employees accepting tips > (since it no longer benefits the employer as it does now for the worker to > be classes as "tipped"), for similar reasons to those for which public > employers already do.

They wouldn't do that at minimum wage, and they get negative value out of a combined pay-more/anti-tip policy.

I don't think it's enough to fix the problems with tipping culture.

<comment><USER48> > Now they're getting minimum wage and I still feel the need to tip.

I'm not sure that your dislike of your own sense of obligation is sufficient cause for a legal prohibition on tipping. I think you _should_ be free to tip (though employers should likewise be free to prohibit employees from accepting tips, and should have fewer reasons not to do so than they currently do.)

OTOH, I would get behind (and meant to include this before) prohibiting employers from taking, offsetting, or redirecting tips, including directing employees in a sharing regime; requiring tips, if given and accepted (employers would be permitted to prohibir the latter as a condition of employment, so long as the policy was uniform) to be property of the recieving employee independent of the employer. Basically, they are now a dodge around sales taxes for many employers, but effectively still revenue that the employer controls, within some limits, which gives employers a big reason to protect tipping culture.

<comment><USER50> What sense of "obligation" are you referring to? If it is obligatory then it definitely should be outlawed, because it becomes false advertisement of prices.

<comment><USER48> > What sense of "obligation" are you referring to?

The sense of "sense of obligation" in play when one says "I feel the need to tip", as I would have thought was obvious by the quoted bit I responded to.

> If it is obligatory then it definitely should be outlawed

It is not _actually_ obligatory (except where it is advertised as required, in which case there is no false advertising), even if some people have a _sense_ of obligation which demands tipping.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> How is this not wage theft? They're literally taking the tips from workers and using it to pay them. I'm tipping the worker, not Instacart.

<comment><USER51> I thought that was simply how tipping worked. Wage+tips have to average (at least) minimum wage.

It's obviously a terrible system, but is this different from how most everywhere with tipping in the US works? I've never worked a tipped job in the US.

<comment><USER52> Many, many decades ago when I worked in a restaurant, the rule was tipped employees needed to be paid at least 50% of the standard minimum wage. At the end of the day, if the employee didn't clear the minimum wage rate with the total of their wage + tips, the employer was required to fork over the additional amount to equal the minimum wage.

However, the absolute bare minimum the employer was allowed to pay was 50% of minimum wage. Not sure if this was just state-specific or if it changed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> This is ridiculous! We need to start moving away from tipping. This reminds me of US restaurants. I'd much rather be charged mandatory service fees. It's a poor way to signal poor food/service by hurting those in front than the cooks behind.

</comment><comment><USER54> WTF is going on?!

Some engineer somewhere decided or was told: Hey if someone gets a big tip, lets consider that as part of their pay and not pay they what's due. And then they just blindly do it?!

I can understand that an engineer might just be following requirements, but _someone_ made that decision--probably a PM, or does this go higher than that?

It seems that companies (FB, Google, etc.) are almost going out of their way to be evil!

We need the equivalent of a "known to do evil" blacklist: companies and employees known to have been working on specific products/projects should be black-balled:

You wrote a VPN to collect information off people's phones? Good luck getting work with another tech company. You wrote/designed functionality to get kids to play games that require money and is hidden from their parents? Screw you. You wrote/designed a feature that said that people should be screwed out of their wage because they got a big tip? F you.

</comment><comment><USER55> DoorDash does the same thing, which is why I stopped using them as well.

Source: [https://www.reddit.com/r/doordash/comments/963kyv/if_you_are...](https://www.reddit.com/r/doordash/comments/963kyv/if_you_are_a_customer_do_not_tip_via_the_app/?st=JRICRPTX&sh=61c36ffa)

</comment><comment><USER6> I read it as they paid him only $0.38 (not $0.80) for his time.

<comment><USER56> You are correct. You can't really count mileage reimbursement as "pay." It's a reimbursement for wear and tear, fuel, etc.

I mean, it's hard to fathom how you could get worse than $0.80. But less than half that? That's worse for sure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> I'm European, in my country if an employer only try to do something like that go strait to the jail. Now is in progress a process to guarantee to the guys employed in the delivery of food by bike a minimum wage because they was exploited by some companies, but that case isn't distantly comparable to this one. I can't believe this behavior it's tolerated in a civilized nation.

</comment><comment><USER58> What absolute garbage, it defies the entire point of tipping. Is this even legal? If a restaurant got caught doing this, they would definitely lose many customers or even get run out of business.

<comment><USER59> It's the norm in many states, so I don't think so. I grew up in IL where waiters make something like $3 / hour. If that + tips is less than minimum wage then the company has to make up the difference. Not quite the same as they don't dock your pay if you make good tip money, but same principle.

<comment> munk-a It works out to the same end result (with the exception that waiters usually have some absolute minimum wage they can earn, so if a waiter makes 20$/hr in tips the restaurant still need to pay a bit on top of that.

One super annoying thing about this system and people choosing not to tip is a situation like this, assume a waiter is serving two customers in an hour, the local minimum wage is $9/hr and the sub-minimum wage is $3/hr, the first customer tips $4 dollars, yielding a potential wage excess of $2 (assuming a reliable rate) when the second customer tips $0 then the waiter ends up making no money beyond minimum wage. So if you're a tipper another customer that doesn't tip can cancel out your tip.

I'm not certain how these are aggregated from an accounting perspective, but I wouldn't be surprised if the window was either a full day or a pay period (in the latter case, every two weeks someone totals $3 * hrs worked, adds on total tips and verifies if that number is above $9 * hrs worked (do nothing) or is below (make up the difference out of the employer's pocket.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> Why do they even have a "tip" field is beyond me, you already paid for delivery, what do you tip for??!!! And on top they ask you for a tip amount _before_ the service is even performed. Tip is to reward for extra work that server did, what extra work is there in food delivery service? And how do you measure it _before_ you even got the food??

</comment><comment><USER61> The whole tipping system should be stopped. The businesses will be forced to start paying fair wages to their workers.

<comment><USER62> A restaurant in my neighborhood did not have tipping before New York raised its minimum wage to $15 because they paid their servers a "fair wage". It has since re-implemented tipping.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> My wife looked into instacart and we canceled after learning they don't provide business car insurance for their drivers. What a scam.

</comment><comment><USER64> This is terrible for the worker and highly deceptive to the client. Surely this is fraud? Collecting tips but not passing it on?

<comment><USER65> Of course it's illegal to steal tips, but actually enforcing that is another matter. Companies will blatantly build illegal business models. And of course some developer coded this automated tip stealing.

<comment><USER66> Can you cite any statute that says this is illegal?

<comment><USER67> Might fit under fraud. I hope it does. When I first learned of this tactic, I felt tricked. I assumed with a tip, that I was boosting someone's salary for a job well done. I'm sure it's debatable, and that my assumption was wrong? But I imagine most people feel this what a tip is.

Fraud n. the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right.

<comment><USER68> It's explicitly illegal under Washington State law:

RCW 49.46.020 section 3:

"Tips and service charges paid to an employee are in addition to, and may not count towards, the employee's hourly minimum wage."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> I guess this is how you actually disrupt a labour-intensive industry. You lower costs, or provide a much better service that somehow established companies haven't been able to provide profitably.

Sure, you can try to use technology and innovation to reduce overhead. That's the pitch usually, I think. If you can provide a service with a lower headcount, you can be much more cost-efficient. But it seems a lot of the companies aiming for disruption aren't able to actually do that, so instead they reduce payroll costs by simply refusing to take on the responsibilities employers are traditionally expected to take.

It'll be interesting to see how long this model of "disruption" can be sustained.

</comment><comment><USER70> (The following is completely predicated on the truth of the report that a customer tipping $x doesn't result in workers' total compensation being increased by $x)

As a YC alum, I'm disgusted to see a YC company behaving like this.

Instacart: It shouldn't have to be said, but you don't cheat your customers and workers. Whatever internal rationalization you've developed for this practice is just that — a rationalization.

Stop cheating people. If your unit economics are so broken that you can't survive without deceiving and cheating people, then shut down instead.

</comment><comment><USER71> Uber was great until they introduced tipping, and somehow now we are supposed to tip employees for delivering stuff when the _entire_ business model of the company we are also paying is delivery?! Why are we supposed to tip door dash drivers, but not Amazon delivery drivers or FedEx/UPS/USPS? I refuse to use Door Dash due to the expectation of tipping their employees on top of the super high up-charges and service fee I'm paying FOR DELIVERY.

Tipping has ruined this whole new batch of convenience services for me.

</comment><comment><USER72> people should simply NOT tip. At restaurant maybe because it is socially mandatory, but anywhere else, a signal should be sent that it is stupid and doesn't make any economical sense to tip!

<comment><USER73> It is not "socially" mandatory as much as the workers suffer otherwise because they are paid less than minimum wage.

<comment><USER74> If an employee who earns tips does not make the equivalent of minimum wage pay his or her hours worked, then the employer is required to pay difference (i.e., employees will be paid at least minimum wage for their work)

<comment><USER75> Not tipping still makes the workers still suffer, though, because with tips, many of many of them make above minimum wage.

Honestly, in the general case, I don't understand how anyone can manage to live on minimum wage, unless they live in a barracks, their mother's basement, or under a bridge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> The tip economy SUCKS. When will it stop! Now it's part of the future that is being sold to us as the new nirvana. Why can't things change?

Employers love it since they can underpay. Some employees love it since they can make a very good living but that's a fraction of the total. But overall it creates an economy subclass that's constantly struggling. They have trouble paying the bills. It's tough work plus they have to deal with upset customers even though they likely had no control of the situation.

I'm a fan of a permanent surcharge on the bill rather than having to deal with giving a tip. Pizza delivery places have a delivery charge now plus a fuel surcharge, as far as I am concerned they can add a service charge too.

Yes, services will become more expensive. But over time an economic equilibrium begins to appear at which time we can reevaluate and change. But the last thing we need to do is bring it into the future.

</comment><comment><USER77> This is why I never tip on Prime Now, Instacart, Uber, Lyft, or Postmates: I don't trust them. Show me whatever the price is, and based on that I'll decide whether to use your service today. I'm not interested in voluntarily giving your business money.

</comment><comment><USER78> I've always wondered why someone hasn't tried to reverse the model on these delivery service apps (postmates, doordash, instacart)

Instead of delivery people blindly accepting orders and hoping for the best, the people who are requesting the delivery should have to set a rate at order time and make the full order and destination visible so couriers can decide if it's worth it and make a counter-offer if it's too low to be worth it.

If you ever go read what the workers are saying in subreddits for these services, it's clear that the incentives for quick and accurate deliveries just don't line up with the current gig system.

<comment><USER79> > the people who are requesting the delivery should have to set a rate at > order time

That's an interesting idea --- reminds me of e-coins with variable transaction fees. You can offer more if you want people to work on your transaction faster.

</comment></comment><comment><USER80> I suspect DoorDash is doing something similar, that's why I always choose 0 tip on the app and tip them cash when they arrive.

</comment><comment><USER81> German reader here. Because of minimum wage you'd only tip if service was good (or always tip if you have enough money, my parents generation are more frugal than I am). Delivery services often get around minimum wage because they use the "Uber" trick and technically the drivers are "self-employed", always tipping those folks.

Anyway: Are tips taxable in the US? Here in Germany tips are tax-free under certain conditions: If I give it directly to the barber, waiter, etc., it is a non-taxable event, while if the employer collects the tip and divides it up under all employees it is a taxable event.

<comment><USER82> Here is a difference between EU countries. In France, you cannot even tip by credit card or anything else that can be controlled by the employer or the state. It's only cash and at your discretion. Thus, it cannot even be a taxable event. However you need to have some cash if you want to tip.

<comment><USER83> I think you can, you have to ask "I want to tip x euros" before the waiter puts your cc in the machine. It feels really awkward and so most don't do it

<comment><USER82> Indeed you are right, you can do it! However they need to add a line to the invoice to sell you something more (e.g. a bottle of water). And when they will report what they have sell and what they have buy there will be a difference. So for few customers it may be OK, but they can't do it every time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> Instacart is not the only one of these apps doing this. Amazon Flex/Prime Now also does the same thing: [https://www.reddit.com/r/AmazonFlexDrivers/comments/66zkx7/w...](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmazonFlexDrivers/comments/66zkx7/who_is_going_around_telling_customers_that_amazon/)

There is some back-and-forth in that thread, but the gist of it seems to be the same as here, where Amazon takes tips into account when they calculate the base wage, which can result in getting a low base wage if there's a large tip.

</comment><comment><USER32> Update: Instacart is introducing a $3 minimum on all jobs, in the wake of the 80-cent debacle. [https://www.fastcompany.com/90300962/reeling-from- algorithm-...](https://www.fastcompany.com/90300962/reeling-from-algorithm- glitch-instacart-institutes-3-minimum-fee-for-drivers)

</comment><comment><USER85> FWIW Good Eggs directly states their pro living wage (and no tip necessary) policy on their website:

[https://help.goodeggs.com/hc/en- us/articles/360007378212-Do-...](https://help.goodeggs.com/hc/en- us/articles/360007378212-Do-I-have-to-tip-my-Good-Eggs-delivery-driver-)

I have no stake in them but it's interesting that they addressed this at all, and well before this instacart controversy.

</comment><comment><USER86> This makes me wonder why people bother working for Instacart when there are so many alternatives. I googled for "service economy gig" and got this huge list:

[https://www.wonolo.com/blog/best-gig-economy- apps/](https://www.wonolo.com/blog/best-gig-economy-apps/)

I guess this Wonolo service is for choosing the right services to work for. Now I'm wondering how many Wonolo clones there are. :-)

<comment><USER75> What makes you think these other jobs haven't adopted, or won't adopt the same 'business model'?

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> Instacart doesn't list any company officers or important contacts on their website. I guess because they would end up dealing with irate customers too much.

But here are the vile people responsible for this practice: [https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/instacart#section- cu...](https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/instacart#section-current-team)

</comment><comment><USER88> This really isn't that different than tipping at your favorite bar. Employers artificially pay service workers less than they should with the assumption that the customer will make up the rest. The real answer is to supporting the broken tipping model. Pay people an honest wage and expect them to do their job without expecting a consumer to pay a bribe to get good service.

</comment><comment><USER89> Could someone explain to me what's up with those tips? If I'm doing a job I expect to be paid a specific amount. Tips to me seem like pittance which you would give to someone who at least can't work or something, for services you just pay a normal price which the owner of the place needs to calculate with.

I'm often thinking about Mr. Pink in Reservoir Dogs [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4sbYy0WdGQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4sbYy0WdGQ) he makes the point I'm also trying to make. People should get paid for doing service and not need to rely on pittance of the customers because their bosses don't calculate the real cost of doing business. If it were up to me tips would be forbidden.

In Japan (as far as I understand) it's an insult to tip, it's almost like: "This business probably isn't doing well enough to pay you a proper salary, so here's a little something extra."

</comment><comment><USER90> Absolutely terrible practice, and dishonest to both their workers and customers. Shame on Instacart -- never using them again.

</comment><comment><USER91> Always tip in cash. Tips should be a purely private thing, nobody but the tipper and the tipped should know about the tip.

<comment><USER92> Technically the IRS gets a cut, but yes, no private entity needs to know.

<comment><USER91> Perhaps it does but my opinion is it should not.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER93> Gigeconomy is just modern day slavery dressed as an informal employee contract with, "work your own hours".

</comment><comment><USER73> This is why the tipping system in the US is absurd. The whole "you must tip because they get paid peanuts" argument is a circular logic. How about making sure that the worker gets paid fairly by their employer and customers can then optionally tip for outstanding service?

<comment><USER94> That's not the logic behind the tipping system. It's, "tipping incentives employees to perform well because they'll make more money for doing a better job".

It doesn't work that way either, but that's the rationale.

Forcing people to tip to ensure people get paid enough money is a consequence of the system, not the reasoning why the system is implemented.

<comment><USER95> People do make the argument that you should tip generously because they're poorly paid.

<comment><USER96> The very people writing these workers' paychecks are effectively making this argument.

<comment><USER97> The very people collected those checks are making those arguments, directly. Lets be honest, service staff prefer the way it is. They can prey on their customers, and they end up making more than they would if paid min wage.

<comment><USER98> Most service staff are probably thinking within a set framework, where getting a minimal base pay is a foregone conclusion.

A more interesting and useful comparison would be to poll individuals who have held similar service industry jobs in countries that do and do not have tipping cultures, and ask them which they preferred and why.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> purple-again I'm confused and hoping someone can clear it up. My understanding is you are allowed to pay well below minimum wage to employees that receive tips. If the sum of those tips plus what you pay them does not equal or exceed minimum wage the employer is required to pay them more money until they reach minimum wage. This isn't often an issue because tipped employees will beat minimum wage significantly.

Is this not Instacart doing the same thing where your wage is .82 plus tips as long as that amount is above x wage. If it's below x they will pay you x.

However in this instance it's an issue because the tipped employees are not often making more than x even with tips therefore the consumer is misled about who their tip money is going to.

</comment><comment><USER99> In a context of pushback over casual hire/gig-economy workers and their actual employment status this feels like both egregiously stupid and possibly illegal behaviour, which the company does because its a scofflaw. If its legal its wrong. if its illegal then its wrong both equitably and legally.

I can't see in either case how its sustainable business practice to offer gig work, but claim the tip is the pay.

I really wish there were penalties reserved for CEO and Board of these startups, which couldn't be passed on to shareholders or customers.

Flaying alive feels like it might be about all we've got left.

Happy to put on an old crone's clothes and sit below the scaffold knitting, while it happens. Maybe the sans-culottes had a point?

</comment><comment><USER100> Should be shut down.

</comment><comment><USER101> Isn't this what restaurant's do with wait staff in the US? I know in NJ wait staff are required to be paid minimum wage. Typically the restaurant pays them less (I think it was around $3) and then their tips get them to minimum wage. If they don't get enough tips the restaurant is required to pay them the difference(although in practice I'm not sure this ever happens)

If someone is willing to be paid $10 to deliver groceries, does it matter who is paying them $10 for it?

I've never used instacart before. Is the verbiage around leaving a tip lead the end user to believe that they are giving it directly to the person making the delivery?

</comment><comment><USER102> In the ancient history of gratuity, tips were originally given _before_ any service was received so that you can get priority service. It's absurd that tips now feel mandatory because of social pressures particularly in the US.

</comment><comment><USER103> Our team of 5 went to a good restaurant/steak place in LA last week, ate and drank for $300, enjoyed the ambience and ate great food, enjoyed the warmth of the service, spent great time together and tipped $75

Who should the tip go to?

\- To the owner who spent/spends a fortune running it in LA?

\- To the chef who catered to our needs without seeing us?

\- To the person who immediately and happily tended to us everytime we raised our heads and looked around

\- To the person who cleared the used plates and never let us wanting for crockery

\- (we tipped the valet guy separately)

I wonder what as a customer should I do? How do I know the share goes to all? I cannot pay cash for that amount. I carry barely $5 with me in cash.

<comment><USER104> It's been 30 years since I worked in a restaurant, but at that particular place the waitstaff received tips and split them according to some formula. I think busboys got 10%, not sure if or how much went to the bartender or anyone "back of house" in the kitchen.

In any case, the owner's revenue is based on the menu pricing; if the owner wants more then the prices get raised. For anyone else, the expectation is likely to be that tips go through the server and are divided from there if they're divided at all. Don't stress too much about tipping the other staff unless someone's gone far above and beyond.

</comment></comment><comment><USER105> I guess the real test of how this system works is:

\-- if TIP > minimum wage \-- does Instacart record a negative -$ adjustment

such that a person's payment will only ever be the maximum payment, regardless of how much tip the customer gives?

That would really be egregious.

</comment><comment><USER106> This is theft from the customer, who tips with the understanding that it will be extra money in the worker's pocket.

Disgusting, reprehensible, and frankly unbelievable. I've never used Instacart and now I never will.

</comment><comment><USER107> > We include tips in the calculation so that you can get a more accurate > picture of what your earnings will be after completing the batch.

> Tips have always been included in our calculation of earnings and it helps > provide a reminder to customers that you are providing a valuable service.

Being fed garbage like that is pretty insulting, though it's interesting to see how far they're willing to stretch logic to try to put a positive spin on it. I mean, "we reduce your earnings so you can feel useful"? Man, logic broke right there.

</comment><comment><USER108> One of the many things that I love about the Netherlands is the lack of tipping in the culture. People get paid a decent wage, and so tipping is only something done if the service is amazing.

<comment><USER109> I'm almost with you there. Get rid of tipping completely. Employers should pay people a decent wage and reward excellent behavior. Don't put that on the customer at all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER110> When workers are thieving from their employer there is a very real prospect of jail. There seems to be no prospect of jail for managers thieving from workers. Why is that?

</comment><comment><USER111> What I don't understand is why the law in USA allows someone be employed, and by signing some contract thing still count as if she is not employed.

In Russia, distinction is clear in law. Do you pay her regularly? I. e. at least one a month? Then she is employee, no matter who says what.

I understand less protection for workers, less vacation, less regulation overall, this is all understandable. I don't understand why facts are ignored in favor of words.

<comment><USER112> In the U.S., there is a multi-factor test if someone is an employee. Just paying someone regularly isn't enough. You might get a haircut once a month, but your barber clearly isn't an employee. It requires more, like control over their day-to-day actions, if you provide benefits, and several other factors.

The Russian law may seem clear, but in reality it's just a stand-in for a more complex analysis.

</comment></comment><comment><USER113> I've read that similar happens in Guitar Center.

Basically, all floor employees salary is commission based. If you don't get enough commission, they will pay you minimal wage but will get rid of you in several months, otherwise your sale commission kind of "fills" your salary until it gets to minimal wage, and only then starts to increase your wage.

Won't be surprised if most of retail works in similar way.

</comment><comment><USER114> I always tip in cash, except in the rare cases where I happened to not have cash on me. I am always under the assumption that this kind of thing is the default not the exception; when you add tip to a credit card who knows what happens when the mothership sucks up that cash and filters it through various middlemen before finally (if ever) getting to the person who provided a service to you.

</comment><comment><USER115> What would the worker have received if the customer had tipped $50 on a smaller order? Would Instacart have pocketed the additional $40?

</comment><comment><USER88> This really isn't that different than tipping at your favorite bar. Employers artificially pay service workers less than they should with the assumption that the customer will make up the rest. The real answer is to supporting the broken tipping model. Pay people an honest wage and expect them to do their job without requiring a consumer to pay a bribe to get good service.

</comment><comment><USER116> This is terrible, but unsurprising.

The whole gig thing is basically passing the risks associated with having employees (injuries and managing them) / sales variation risks (having to pay people when sales are up or down) onto folks who are no longer employees.

The idea that they'd take even more from their contractors based on other factors just seems natural.

Maybe a "franchise fee" type thing is next....

</comment><comment><USER117> I'm not an American so looking at this from afar - but according to this tips go straight to 'Shoppers'? Are they actually doing something completely different?

[https://www.instacart.com/help/section/200761964#11500564332...](https://www.instacart.com/help/section/200761964#115005643323)

<comment><USER118> The tips go straight to the shoppers, yeah. And then their pay gets, you know, "adjusted" (in Instacart's favor) in the amount of the tip.

The whole point of the tip is that it is supposed to be a bonus on top of the worker's normal pay. Instead, here it is displacing the money that Instacart would have otherwise paid them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER119> Absolutely crazy. By comparison, Go-Jek in Indonesia ends up paying their scooter delivery workers about about $3-$4 on average per hour (in my experience) depending on traffic, for deliveries (food, shopping, etc). There is also no option to tip in the app, and tipping isn't expected but isn't alien either.

</comment><comment><USER120> Really disgusting behavior, honestly I think the "gig economy" has the right idea of where we are headed, we are moving to a service / high skill (technology) economy. Gig economy tools combine the best of both worlds, but these exploitative labor practices and low hanging industry targets have got to end.

</comment><comment><USER121> If Instacart can't afford to pay their employees, then they should not operate. They are stealing tips from their employees to make profit. It is unethical to use their service. Stop using it and write them an e-mail explaining why. Feel free to resume using it if they stop this practice and apologize.

</comment><comment><USER122> Are instacart 'employees' private contractors/1099? Wouldn't that mean instacart is even LESS legally able to take their tip money? As in actual employees who are tipped will have a minimum wage that must be met, which is why in some places tipped positioned wages can be as low as $3.

</comment><comment><USER123> Perhaps tipping should always bypass the company.

If there was a popular 3rd party app for tipping directly to any individual, regardless of where they might be or whether they're working or not, that could actually prevent companies from snooping in on the tips. Even at restaurants.

</comment><comment><USER124> I wonder what happens if a customer tips more than what Instacart would have paid?

I read through the blog post on Medium and the article, but couldn't find any case where the customer had tipped more.

Is $0.80 the minimum payment they will make, or will it decrease further – negative?

</comment><comment><USER125> How is this any different from the what wait/serving staff experience. Most jobs are a flat wage (possibly minimum) and tips. It's always like that and still is. Maybe, the next time you leave a dollar tip for your server, you'll think again.

</comment><comment><USER126> This is an outrage. I used instacart for awhile and eventually stopped - <USER2> just became too expensive. I would always waive the service fee when possible and tip the driver in cash. Glad I did - now knowing they use it to deny living wages.

</comment><comment><USER37> Over the past two years, these kinds of complaints have piled up against Instacart:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instacart#Controversy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instacart#Controversy)

</comment><comment><USER127> Instacart, a YCombinator funded company pays their workers $0.80 cents an hour.

</comment><comment><USER128> Build app to receive tips anonymously.

Integrate seamlessly into checkout experience (like Affirm does for micro lending).

This could prevent Instacart etc from reducing hourly rate based on tips (because they don't have access to that info).

</comment><comment><USER129> I will not use any of these gig economy BS companies.

They're often exploitative of workers and this is just exactly the kind of thing that reinforces my decision to never stay at an AirBNB, never take Lyft, Uber etc.

</comment><comment><USER130> This is taking advantage of both the customer and the worker.

I am not an instacart user myself but I use similar services and I expect that any tip will be delivered to the driver.

I'd be pissed off to find out otherwise.

<comment><USER82> I don't live in US, but for sure the only way to ensure your tip goes to the right person is to give it with cash.

</comment></comment><comment><USER128> We should tip shoppers with Venmo, Cash App, Paypal, etc, when the shopper delivers.

Instacart won't see this transaction and therefore won't reduce their wages.

Less convenient. But this policy is unfair.

</comment><comment><USER131> Vote with your wallet - tweeting/posting/complaining is fine and should be done - but _denying them revenue_ is a universally effective message to bad businesses.

</comment><comment><USER132> Just don't tip. Tipping is bullshit.

It's company responsibility to set the pricing policy so everyone one gets paid.

If they don't pay their workers, it's not my problem.

</comment><comment><USER133> It's almost like working as a contractor for instacart is a crappy job that people should quit doing since it doesn't pencil out financially...

</comment><comment><USER134> What happens if the tip exceeds the actual cost of the service? If the tip was $11 would they deduct $0.20 from the tip? This is completely absurd.

</comment><comment><USER135> No Instacart for me. This is not OK at all.

Others have said why. I will spend some time to make others aware.

I really hate this sort of thing. Viscerally.

</comment><comment><USER122> I would be interested in seeing a gig economy service being run and equally shared by the employees, or worker-owned.

</comment><comment><USER66> This is legal though right? Isn't it the same way restaurants pay their servers so little wage?

My opinion is abolish tip culture.

</comment><comment><USER50> It's about time tipping died, that's the bottom line. There never was a good outcome to opaque pricing.

</comment><comment><USER136> So you are essentially thanking and tipping instacart, not the worker. Evil like a villain from a disney movie.

</comment><comment><USER137> What if a tip amound exceeds a worker's payment amount? Will they demand from the worker to pay?

</comment><comment><USER138> Haha what the fuck? And who was the brilliant mind behind this thinking it would be okay to do this?

</comment><comment><USER139> Hm, 42 cents of that was his mileage pay for the trip. 38 cents was his actual salary.

</comment><comment><USER140> Anyone know if Amazon Prime Now or other similar delivery services operate the same?

</comment><comment><USER141> I use instacart weekly. Not going to leave them any tip via the platform anymore...

</comment><comment><USER142> Why $.22? Is that the minimum before the tip has an impact on the nominal rate?

</comment><comment><USER37> i heard this same thing from an instacart worker more than a year ago. at the time i was confused and kind of doubted her story, but now i see that Instacart employment really is just as shitty as she said. wow.

</comment><comment><USER143> I don't get it. Should the minimum wage be excluding tips?

Edit: I meant shouldn't.

<comment> dan-robertson Well typically people give tips under the understanding that they are supplementing the worker's income, rather than the company's bottom line

</comment></comment><comment><USER144> oh really? employer paying way less than minimum wage because employee gets to keep some of the tips is shocking news now? ever heard of restaurants? they have been doing this for decades.

</comment><comment><USER145> I swear to god I am never going to order from instacart ever again.

</comment><comment><USER146> Shame on them.

The gig economy has so many problems like this it is silly.

</comment><comment><USER147> Where's the outrage for the millions of service industry employees who _also_ have to deal with this, and have been dealing with this for decades?

Why's Instacart getting the unique bad press?

<comment><USER148> In part because they've added a layer of deception to the practice. In part—and I'm speculating here—because this is a young company, founded and run by people in (or nearly in) our cohort, and were disappointed in them as peers (albeit peers who struck it rich).

<comment><USER147> Maybe, I'm leaning towards the, "people didn't realize what tip wages were" explanation though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER149> and to think I was just about to sign up and use it with www.bjs.com. Now that won't be happening

</comment><comment><USER150> DoorDash does this too.

</comment><comment><USER151> (just tip in cash)

</comment><comment><USER152> Problem here: Isn't Instacart but the so called rich-hipster millenials that need / want / to use Instacart. Or lazy or just for the sake of convenience at the sake of a poor soul, don't wanna shop groceries for themselves. If your time is limited then you could easily use Amazon fresh/ Walmart / Boxed for your groceries. But nah, it's SV 2.0 Human exploitation at it's finest, Capitalism as usual. & to people building these services, put humans first. It's sad to see someone in HEB wearing a green tshirt shopping for someone - it's like society has rendered these people useless only fit to serve master. Basically slavery 2.0 with a little wage on top.

</comment><comment><USER153> Startup culture is a study in psychopathy.

\- lack of empathy: Uber, Instacart, etc. etc. etc., exploiting the poor

\- parasitic behavior: aggressive tax optimisation/tax evasion, Amazon employees relying on food stamps for subsistance

\- superficial charm: get rich quick

\- pathological lying: cf. Facebook denying they ever did anything wrong

\- manipulativeness: "make the world more open and connected"

and my personal favorite,

\- grandiosity: "change the world!", "solve physics for good!", "be immortal!"

<comment><USER154> That's quite a broad generalization. For sure a lot of the biggest names have done ethically questionable things. It's no doubt that growing that fast and gaining that much power is going to hugely amplify whatever ethical flaws the founders have. And no one is ethically perfect. That's not to excuse Uber, Facebook, Google, Amazon or any of the more egregious companies.

But it's just a case of confirmation bias if you didn't look for counter- examples to try to disprove your theory.

Are the following companies ethically perfect? I doubt it. But I haven't heard much bad about them and they have changed my life for the better significantly: AirBnb, Dropbox, Stripe, Rappi, WhatsApp, Square, Netflix. I bet I could find others.

<comment><USER12> WhatsApp is owned by Facebook as of 2014, so unfortunately all the same issues with Facebook apply to them too.

<comment><USER154> I agree that folks have very good reason to keep a much closer eye on what WhatsApp actually does, and also what the user agreement says. However, you can't say that the WhatsApp team or product is necessarily and already violating people's privacy in the same ways as Facebook is. You can have all the healthy skepticism you want, but it doesn't mean that WhatsApp is doing those things.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER155> Dick move, instant back lash

</comment><comment> atom-morgan Seriously, this is the responsibility consumers have in a free market. If there's behavior you don't like, move on. You don't get to complain about bad actors when you're literally keeping them in business.

<comment><USER156> Collective action is essentially impossible among consumers though. Boycotts essentially never work. Not only that, but who are you going to use instead of instacart: Amazon Fresh? Uber? Or will you drive yourself to the store and buy it from minimum wage employees who work unstable hours? Also, what do you think the working conditions were like for whoever picked that asparagus?

<comment><USER157> >Boycotts essentially never work

Is this true?

<comment><USER158> No, this is not true.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_bus_boycott](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_bus_boycott)

<comment><USER159> The consumer collective-action economic effects of that boycott changed _nothing_. What did change things was the _government action it triggered_ :

> Pressure increased across the country. The related civil suit was heard in > federal district court and, on June 4, 1956, the court ruled in Browder v. > Gayle (1956) that Alabama's racial segregation laws for buses were > unconstitutional. As the state appealed the decision, the boycott continued. > The case moved on to the United States Supreme Court. On November 13, 1956, > the Supreme Court upheld the district court's ruling, ruling that > segregation on public buses and transportation was against the law.

<comment><USER160> also keep in mind that the segregation rules were unpopular with the bus companies themselves (think about the infra you need to enforce segregation), as soon as the court ruled against the local laws, the montgomery bus company was rushing to flip over to desegregated.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER161> What are the poor legitimately at fault for then?

I'm tired of this implication that the poor can never be at fault for anything, because they are so poor. It is an overly simplified sympathy that doesn't always reflect reality.

<comment><USER162> Nothing.

Sure, INDIVIDUALS are at fault for a variety of options, but if you're looking to blame the poor as a group for something, you're using the wrong criteria, since it's a status that has no direct mapping to choice.

<comment><USER163> So the rich, powerful and elite are also not responsible for anything either? Just individually?

That seems like quite the atomised society.

<comment><USER162> > the rich, powerful and elite are also not responsible for anything either? > Just individually?

The distinction is that money provides opportunities, poverty is the lack of them.

You can hold the wealthy responsible for what they do with their wealth, or what they don't do with their wealth. Because wealth is something they HAVE. The poor, on the other hand, don't HAVE anything, so you can't say they are using their lack of wealth foolishly, nor can you say they are failing to use their lack of wealth wisely.

<comment><USER98> FWIW, you could argue that they are failing to handle their economic situation as well as they could.

But even that is fraught, since, in the current economic culture, consumers are pretty much constantly being preyed on, and actively encouraged to make questionable decisions. Consider, for example, the predatory mortgage practices on the part of the banking industry during the 2000s. Or predatory lending practices on the part of the student loan and private college industries. Or payday loan companies.

(There's arguably a double standard there - if it's a person with relatively little money swindling people out of relatively small amounts of money, it's con artistry. If it's a company with lots of money swindling people out of lots of money, caveat emptor.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER164> How about paying people who serve you instead of passing the "buck" to the someone else?

Why start tipping for outstanding service, instead of setting the floor at $0 for 0 service?

Answer: because people like to pay less for stuff and let the company eat the blame.

<comment><USER165> Yep, personally, when I go to mcdonalds, I like to pay the guy at the register, the people cooking, the manager, and the unfortunate individual on trash duty all separately.

Additionally, I refuse (on basic principle) to eat at any restaurant where I haven't mapped out their _entire_ supply infrastructure. I made myself an app that keeps track of how much I spend at each of these restaurants in any given month and then I tip each entity a healthy percent (20% being the _minimum_ because really if you can't afford 20% you can't afford to eat out). Currently, I'm tipping the truck drivers that deliver supplies, the factory workers who prepare the frozen food, the farmers, the accountants, the HR department, and the people who do road maintenance on the streets that all of the above use to get to work.

<comment><USER166> "the customer can decide how much he wants to pay everybody in the supply chain" sounds a bit to too much like a possible pitch for a startup.

<comment><USER167> I mean, if that utility of every part of the supply chain was actually surfaced and you could make payments directly to parts of the supply chain, I could see trying that business model out as a consumer.

Whats happening here is that companies have figured out they can just extract value out of a subset of their employees and pass the cost onto their customers by manipulating social norms.

If I'm paying the worker directly they should be treated like a contractor, but the companies want the control of hiring an employee and the responsibilities of hiring a contractor

<comment><USER165> I mean, I see what you're saying. I really do. But it feels a bit cynical to me. Personally, I think everyone should try giving 20% (or more, haven't you ever received some freshly cooked chicken nuggets and just __knew __that they were delivered to the store with extra care) to every individual and /or corporate entity in the entire supply chain. It just increases the feeling of community in an ever growing global landscape.

<comment><USER168> I don't agree, I think money is a fairly poor incentice for _increasing the level of community_ and might even do the opposite and make it too profit- based. I think everyone should be putting the extra effort on treating others with care instead! _That_ increases the feeling of community.

Got those lovely nuggets? Buy there again, tell their manager how great the service was, and be a great customer. Also, treat better the next person you interact with, don't just offset your morale to paying some dollars and then be an assh __e...

<comment><USER165> (psst, this series of responses are kind of a joke)

<comment><USER168> What do you mean series? And I'm not joking, it's how it works in Japan and it seems to be working great here

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER169> Ouch. But unions are not the answer.

</comment><comment><USER170> Instacart is AWFUL.

They're paying shit wages and thus offering shit quality, because they're offering a service that literally is unscalable. The logistics of laser- guided-bomb-type delivery of groceries from store to fridge is asinine.

Yo, grocery store shopping doesn't suck bad enough to pay someone else to do both the shopping and delivering! I'll pick up the pre-picked-up/bought groceries. I don't need you to delivery them directly to my fridge; I think I can handle that part. Just bring them out to my car when I pull up.

Problem solved, wages go up, quality goes up, I get my groceries. Everybody wins.

<comment><USER171> I saw the ceo speak at a YC event in NYC a few years ago, and I looked around the room and thought "what the fuck is this shit". I guess Instacart ticked the checkbox of tackling a problem that doesn't scale, something YC looks for. To me it symbolizes everything I hate about startup culture- the CEO trying to change the world by doing something mundane, the circle jerk celebrating a stupid idea and dubious ethical practices...etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER172> I am 100% in favor of tipping, and all of you people calling to ban it don't understand service jobs. Those doing so should be ashamed, as they are effectively victim-blaming in this context (in what really seems close to wage theft, at least in spirit, by Instacart) to push this cause.

This is really much more a story of ethics in software development. Someone had to know they were doing the wrong thing when they wrote this.

edit: No, not going to talk about tipping. Like it or not, it is extremely common all over the world, and unrelated to this submission (which is about lowering "shopper's" compensation to almost negligible levels when tips are given).

<comment><USER173> Why are you in favor of tipping? Can you justify your reasoning?

<comment><USER174> Not parent commenter, but the common argument is that for the class of service jobs where the employee's role is to interface with the customer and provide them a service, customers are in a better position to assess the employee's job performance than a manager. For that class of jobs, giving customers influence over the employee's "merit bonuses" is a more accurate system of rewarding performance and requires less managerial oversight to ensure good service.

There seems to be some logic to that to me. Whether that justifies a reduction in the minimum base wage for tipped roles, etc. I think of as a separate question, but I don't see tipping as a structurally problematic norm as long as the job interacts with many customers and a significant portion of the population actually tips.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER175> This isn't uncommon or new. Many states allow for tips to offset wages, even if wages fall below the minimum wage. Some states even have a separate minimum wage for tipper workers that is below the standard minimum wage.

If you want to blame someone, I suggest looking for the actual culprit and not a law-abiding company. This has little to do with Instacart and everything to do with state wage laws.

<comment><USER176> This was posted by "Working Washington", so it seems reasonable to look at Washington state law: It requires tipped employees to be paid minimum wage. So does the rest of the west coast, including California (where Instacart has it's HQ).

[https://www.dol.gov/whd/state/tipped.htm](https://www.dol.gov/whd/state/tipped.htm)

It is, of course, entirely possible that the worker in question is not on the west coast, but Instacart is still welcome to pay a fair wage even if not required to by law, and Instacart should certainly avoid lying about their business practices either way (from the article: "Even Instacart seems to know how messed up it is to pay workers less when they get tipped more — which is why they've denied the practice when speaking to reporters at Business Insider & the Miami Herald.")

<comment><USER5> Washington state law does not apply. All of the State of Washington laws and constitution are fully invalidated and superseded by the American Arbitration Act.

<comment><USER148> Let's hope that's tested in court.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Secure enclave: Cryptoprocessor with a dedicated display and keyboard - <AUTHOR> https://betrusted.io <comment><USER2> What is the relationship of this product and [https://cryptech.is/](https://cryptech.is/) if any?

<comment><AUTHOR> Nothing I believe. I checked the people involved in both projects and couldn't find any overlap</comment></comment>


Teletext Holidays left 200k customer call recordings exposed - <AUTHOR> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/09/02/teletext_holidays_200k_call_recordings_s3_bucket/ <comment><USER2> > "While basic security measures were implemented, in that customers were told > to input card numbers using the handset, the unique audio tones generated by > pressing keypad buttons would make it straightforward to recover the > 16-digit number and expiry date."

and in the original:

"Instead of saying their card number and three-digit security number, customers type them into the keypad – protecting the most serious financial information."

We should produce a DTMF blockchain, seems like the best security out there. /s On a more serious note: Are regular people/journalists not aware of how pressing buttons on a phone works anymore?

<comment><USER3> _On a more serious note: Are regular people /journalists not aware of how pressing buttons on a phone works anymore?_

Given that a lot of people now think of a phone as being a handheld rectangular device with a touchscreen, I'd say yes.

Even in the days of pulse dialing and the early DTMF (with things like 2600), I think people didn't really know either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > _While basic security measures were implemented, in that customers were told > to input card numbers using the handset, the unique audio tones generated by > pressing keypad buttons would make it straightforward to recover the > 16-digit number and expiry date._

How is that a "basic security measure"? It seems a _lot_ more trivial for a machine to sweep the audio for the keypad tones and looks for 16 digits where the appropriate check digit check out, than to try to parse human speech.

</comment><comment><USER5> Telephones aren't secure. If you care about security, you don't send private data over the phone.

<comment><USER6> I can take some information that you've sent to me over HTTPS and put it in a public FTP... does that mean HTTPS is insecure?

<comment><USER5> No, but taking data from one insecure medium to another is (in my mind) a far lesser crime.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Weird that Teletext is still a brand. The original 'teletext' service died with the death of analogue TV.</comment>


The Last Exorcism Marketing on ChatRoutlette - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNSaurw6E_Q

<comment><USER2> On a semi-related note I have a friend of mine who offers to show her breasts if the guys watching will give eachother a "low two", which means they need to touch their bare asses together on camera. Then she clicks next.

<comment><USER3> I think I'm in love with your friend.

<comment><USER2> That makes two of us.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Question: In the United States, it is legal to capture video footage of under- age of majority individuals and use them in your marketing campaign without their guardian's consent?

<comment><USER5> No, but it is legal to stage what purports to be the same.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Brilliant. Crazy fb connect video game trailers, Old Spice and now this. Online marketing has actually become really entertaining.

<comment><USER7> It's fun, similar to the movie ad that appeared on justin.tv a few years ago as a mock broadcasters channel. (I think the channel showed them 'live' and then some disaster happened or something).

However, doesn't make me want to go see some exorcist movie. Old spice was just in a different league. I actually bought some old spice.

<comment><USER6> "doesn't make me want to go see some exorcist movie."

Watching peoples' reactions doesn't really make me want to go either, but tbh, it _may have_ made me want to see the movie if I experienced that. Not sure how many impressions that they got, but it could be significant.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's a pity that no matter what kind of neat idea you come up with first you get the jerks, then the marketeers will follow, if the spammers don't beat them to it.

</comment><comment><USER9> That was pretty funny. They could have done a lot of other creepy things, rather than the same clip over and over.

</comment><comment><USER10> Clever girl.

</comment><comment><USER11> This was phenomenal!</comment>


Dangers of NeXTSTEP Plists - <AUTHOR> http://pewpewthespells.com/blog/dangers_of_ascii_plists.html <comment><USER2> Oh wow, this is about the NeXTSTEP _format_ for plists. That's really old! Modern plists are either XML or binary.

<comment><USER3> Except Apple keeps using them with Xcode. Here is the xcspec for the Swift compiler. A language from 2014 using NeXTSTEP plist format!

I don't know why they just don't upgrade to xml or binary.

[https://gist.github.com/jevinskie/98a11023f4b561d36b26](https://gist.github.com/jevinskie/98a11023f4b561d36b26)

P.S. Xcode plugins are "fun" to write!

<comment><USER4> .xcspec predates Swift -- it's an Xcode format, not a Swift format -- but I don't remember by how much.

<comment><USER3> Indeed it does! I just find it very curious that Apple hasn't bothered to migrate .xcspecs to one of the newer plist formats. As far as I know, you lose no capabilities with the newer format. Perhaps the NeXTSTEP format is easier to read with a text editor? XML format isn't terrible, and Xcode itself provides a not-bad GUI editor for all plist varieties.

EDIT: I believe that Xcode will load .xcspecs in any format. The .xcspec ends up getting fed into a TSPropertyListDictionary class which is backed by a plain NSDictionary. I'll test tonight. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I really wish Apple would start using something like json or yaml. I hate plists.

<comment><USER6> json and yaml didn't exist in the late 1980s when NEXTSTEP was developed.

<comment><USER7> It is also no longer the 1980s and hasn't been for a while now.

<comment><USER6> Right -- it's simply legacy. Too much work to change it now for not enough benefit.

In 20 years we'll say the same thing about json and yaml. In fact I say it about yaml now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This phrase is hard to understand:

> The NeXT/OpenStep plist format assumes that strings are written as ASCII, > whereas Cocoa assumes strings are written in Unicode

Do they mean "UTF-16" when they say "Unicode"? ASCII is an encoding but "unicode" is not, so I can't make sense of it.

On another note, it's fairly common that \U0000 style escapes are limited to FFFF. Would it work to use a surrogate pair for the non-BMP character?

<comment><USER4> Yes, they mean UTF-16. I don't know if Xcode's parser actually supports surrogate pairs in practice, but it should.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> What is the Radar rdar:// link at the bottom?

<comment><USER10> Apple's internal bug tracker is called Radar.

<comment><USER5> If you're lucky and you reported the bug first you get to find out what happened with the Radar bug. If you weren't the first you get your support request closed and get to hope the original person posted it on Open Radar. If that doesn't pan out you have to actively ask for an update or read release notes.

I like most of Apple's products but I really wish other people didn't so they'd be compelled to fix these long running process failures (and give IT folks a little more love).

<comment><USER11> Yeah. I stopped filing bugs with Apple years ago, except in extreme circumstances[1][2] where the bug is fucking up my daily work, or a serious bug that is blocking one of my apps in development.

The process is just too rude and disrespectful to the submitter to participate in.

Apple behaves like it is Apple doing developers a favor by allowing them to submit bugs, rather than the other way around.

[1] [http://masonmark.com/the-xcode-fairy](http://masonmark.com/the-xcode- fairy)

[2] [http://masonmark.com/more-xcode4-fuckery/](http://masonmark.com/more- xcode4-fuckery/)

<comment><USER5> Apple behaves like it's doing everyone a favor just by existing to be frank. Steve Jobs knew how to get shit done even if he was an asshole about it but that attitude he had permeated the organization. It might not be the right word but the only way I can think to describe the way Apple treats people is "snobbish". You can be awesome and do awesome things without being an asshole about it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I get a 403 page when visiting this page using my browser (Chrome), but cURL works fine. Are they rejecting certain user agents?

<comment><USER13> Apparently they are blocking "deep" links. In chrome, clicking in the url and pressing enter seems to work to reset the referrer (reloading does not).

<comment><USER14> Who blocks deep links into their personal blog? Do think they might need to put up a paywall because they could suddenly become the next New York Times? I am very confused by this.</comment></comment></comment>


Introduction to Statistical Learning - <AUTHOR> http://faculty.marshall.usc.edu/gareth-james/ISL/ <comment><USER2> Hastie and Tibshirani teach a free course based on this book on Stanford's OpenEdX ([https://online.stanford.edu/courses/sohs-ystatslearning- stat...](https://online.stanford.edu/courses/sohs-ystatslearning-statistical- learning)). I highly recommend taking this course or reading the book before delving into ESL. IMO, ESL is excellent as a reference, but trying to learn by reading it linearly is not an optimal time investment.

Now if only a similar course existed for Wasserman's "All of Statistics..."

<comment><USER3> There's a Youtube playlist[1] of recorded lecture videos by Wasserman from his CMU course that uses All of Statistics as a textbook.

I haven't watched more than a couple of mins of them (yet), so no idea how good they are (but the blackboard is quite hard to see in the recordings). However, it obviously doesn't have all the extra stuff that you would get in a proper MOOC.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJPW8OTey_OZk6K_9QLpg...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJPW8OTey_OZk6K_9QLpguoPg_Ip3GkW_)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm a big fan of ISL - one of the best intro machine-learning oriented textbooks out there IMO. If you're looking for book that still offers a broad survey while going a bit deeper into the math, I recommend Elements of Statistical Learning as well (they share 2 authors):

[https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/Papers/ESLII.pdf](https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/Papers/ESLII.pdf)

<comment><USER5> ESL is really really good. Absolutely cannot be recommended enough. I've worked through at few times and it's a great book to have on the shelf.

ISl is good but as it being an introduction book — the lack of higher order math wasn't my favorite.

<comment><USER6> Recommendation for ESL seconded. One of the best ML books in terms of writing, development of intuition, breadth of topics (ofc doesn't cover everything, esp deep learning).

What I love about the book is how the topics are "connected" so to speak. The narrative within a theme is typically "let's look at problem P, here's technique Q to solve P, but if you thought about P slightly differently you would see something like technique R would also work, so let's talk about that now".

The level of math might be tough for a beginner though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The authors also published a set of very good lectures covering content in the book: [https://www.r-bloggers.com/in-depth-introduction-to- machine-...](https://www.r-bloggers.com/in-depth-introduction-to-machine- learning-in-15-hours-of-expert-videos/)

</comment><comment><USER8> I'm currently working through this book. Highly recommend, even if you have no intention on learning R. The R part is very limited, you will not learn R programming, but if you already know R, it is very useful to end each chapter with a practical demonstration of the theory.

</comment><comment><USER9> I am trying to decide between going through a statistical learning vs. a deep learning textbook/course. Any thoughts on what would be more rewarding for someone with no immediate plans to work in ML nor do graduate level research. Thank you.

</comment><comment><USER10> This is one of my all time favorite technical books. I wrote a review of sorts a few years back[0]. It doesn't cover any deep learning topics, which perhaps dates it at this point, but it gives solid fundamentals on a breadth of techniques common in industry. This is always in my recommendation list for folks making the transition from more systems or product engineering to ML.

[0] [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/introduction-statistical- lear...](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/introduction-statistical-learning- book-luke-duncan)

<comment><USER9> Noticed your comment after posting mine: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24056852](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24056852)

I was wondering if in retrospect you would have preferred reading the Goodfellow deep learning book vs. this?

<comment><USER11> I've read both, and I would strongly recommend ISL first as it's much broader and covers the basics much much better than the Goodfellow book.

<comment><USER10> Agreed. I've read both and would also recommend this first. The good fellow book goes deep fast. This was my review at the time [https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2196621333](https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2196621333)

That said, if your choice is more general, statistical learning vs deep learning, I'm sure at this point you can find more approachable deep learning primers. This book just isn't it IMHO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've been working my way through this book, and it's fantastic. I love the way this book grounds all the discussion of statistical learning with a practical data analysis problem.

</comment><comment><USER13> Is there a book of similar quality that uses Python?

</comment><comment><USER14> Great book. My go-to stats book. It was one of my first intro. book for statistics with R in undergrad days.

</comment><comment><USER15> Great resource if one is wanting to learn R.

<comment><AUTHOR> > [I]f one is wanting to learn R

A useful practice, in my experience, is to implement R code samples in some other language, like C/D. Implementing lower level math functions for oneself can also be fun instead of relying on a library, depending on one's ultimate goals/interests.

<comment><USER16> I'm a data scientist without a formal background in programming. Can someone please explain why implementing math functions in C/D is different than doing it in R?

For example, I would assume that creating a mean function using numbers and operators would be language-agnostic.

<comment><USER17> \- R: the mean function is already created

\- C: You will create the mean function

It's the difference between using a calculator and knowing how to multiply two 5 digit numbers with pen and paper.

You might say, "Oh but we can do that in R". Well, if you start doing that one function at a time, very soon you find yourself with R grinding to a halt.

<comment><USER18> If you want to you can recreate the mean function in R as well, so why would you choose to do it in another language if your goal is to learn R?

<comment><USER19> No good reason for C/D/... other than the wanting to learn the particular language. Otherwise, use R or Julia to stay in the scientific domain.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Stem cell treatment reverses MS in 70% of patients in small study - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/06/risky-stem-cell-treatment-reverses-ms-in-70-of-patients-in-small-study/ <comment><USER2> "the trial was small and did not include a control group."</comment>


Why Your "Collectibles" Are Worthless - <AUTHOR> http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2011/03/26/why-your-collectibles-are-worthless/

<comment><USER2> What is this about? I'm sure there are plenty of things that are collectible and that people pay money for. There are also probably plenty of people who own stuff they think is worth way more than it is.

And what's with all the points? Surely the only one you need is "these things aren't selling for a high price right now". That is either true or false, you can find out if it's true or false for your specific items and once you've done that who cares about the other stuff?

So why is this article here? Is there a context that gives it meaning for some people here that I'm not getting? Maybe it's because I don't own anything I believe to be worth lots of money for being collectible...

</comment><comment><USER3> A more serious take: The Trough of No Value. [http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photogra...](http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/02/the- trough-of-no-value.html) and Doctorow's commentary: <http://boingboing.net/2009/02/10/trough-of-no-value-t.html> "If all ephemera were preserved [well], [their value] would never rebound, because it would never become scarce."

</comment><comment><USER4> Yes, it's mostly true, but reeks of pure bitterness. Not everyone is broke, and some people like spending money. I suppose it depends on what you are collecting.

</comment><comment><USER5> When trying to sell some "Collectibles" on eBay, you can gain a lot by carefully crafting a detailed item description, with more than one photo of superb quality. Also emphasize what makes this item collectible or rare, and sprinkle in some sentences saying how desireable the item is. Finally, wait until autumn or winter, because most "Collectors" don't buy very much during the summer. That way, you may get a lot higher bids for your collectible than some other random seller who sells his items with bad or stock photos and descriptions with virtually no details.

Some time ago, I sold some old, rare computer games on eBay this way. There are several boxes of games in my attic at this time that I "collected" some years ago, and I hope to sell them for a descent price some time in the future (when I find the time to take photos and craft good item descriptions).

</comment><comment><USER6> If you can go onto Ebay and find more than one or two of the item you are selling it's probably not a "collectible" or at any rate it's not something you are going to get a lot of money for.</comment>


The Klein Bottle Guy – With Cliff Stoll Podcast - <AUTHOR> https://www.numberphile.com/podcast/cliff-stoll <comment> 076ae80a-3c97-4 I really enjoy listening to Cliff. 'The Cuckoo's Egg' is easily one of the great books regarding old-school hacking.</comment>