Like other commentators I'd argue that the intentions don't matter much, the outcome does.

"The purpose of a system is what it does" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...)

https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/come-on-obviously-the-purpo...

	▲	fhennig 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks for replying that. I think after reading this, I'd go with what was said at the end: “There is no such thing as an unintended consequence” - Amazon claiming that what they're doing is to the benefit of consumers is bullshit. Obviously Amazon knows about all of what's going on (i.e. they cause prize inflation elsewhere) and they willfully tolerate these consequences of their policy.

▲

oblio 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Brilliant. Like how Google websites constantly deprioritized Firefox (and promoted Chrome) and slowly killed it.

▲

mihaaly 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"Designing a system to incentivize sellers to have their lowest prices on Amazon..." so that vendors like the above person getting "the systemic effect that in order for the sellers to get their *sweet purchase orders from Amazon, they now need to raise prices elsewhere" IS intentional!

'Designing a sytem' to 'raise prices elsewhere'!

Probably the person's intent was to protect Amazon, but in my eye this is just providing a very strong real evidence against them now.