7 ms·

It's a business after all and China is a huge market for Apple. No one ever said that capitalism was very aligned with human rights. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

FRex 9y ago
> No one ever said that capitalism was very aligned with human rights. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Typical answer I heard in this case is that you can create your own Apple and provide better and cheaper service and respects human rights. (No, in the eyes of mindless capitalists[1] barrier to entry doesn't exist.) [1] By that I mean people who say every single problem on Earth will be forced if only all regulations and governments are dissolved and 'free market' can 'regulate itself properly'.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  The phone market isn't exactly open. There is more or less a government chartered oligopoly in mobile data industry. Those companies were leveraged to create the initial consumer lock in that Apple enjoys now. Interoperability without Apple's consent is also possible but it's a government chartered monopoly on technology (copyrights, patents, bans on circumvention) that prevents that. All that being said, you're talking to straw men here. Most died in the wool free market types still see a role for the government in preventing market abuse, including fraud, monopolies, insider trading, etc.
  - FRex 9y ago
    I'm not saying it's open. But clearly capitalism doesn't lead to solutions of all problems ever, as evidenced by this. But then a right winger will visit Shanghai, talk to a bunch of happy Chinese and make a YouTube video where he says that in China everyone is happy and rich while in EU your daily life is a struggle against Calais EuroTunnel stowaways or something. The only thing that allows China to do all these is political will of the people in countries that enable it. Somehow North Korea doesn't get a free pass but China does. As long as people value cheap products and ruthless 'capitalism' and 'free market' (if you can even call China that with all the governmental interference) more than rights of ordinary (i.e. not ones in central Shanghai) Chinese this will keep happening.
    - Clubber 9y ago
      So what do you want Apple to do? Leave the China market and allow a government owned phone company to take the market share? How is that scenario better for anyone in the US or China? I mean being angry that the Chinese government isn't great at human rights is one thing, but to point that anger at Apple is a bit misguided, and what do you suggest that would actually make the problem better?
      - FRex 9y ago
        I don't know. That's why it's even a problem. If there was an easy answer then Apple would just do it (or not) and there would be no discussion or dilemma to be had and we'd all applaud them or shit on them depending on if they did the right thing or not. It's a very tough problem because on one side isolating is bad and allows the oppressive governments to create 'us with them' rhetoric and replace foreign companies with domestic ones that are absolutely subservient to them, on the other, abandoning your original principles and showing that you can be part of 'the West' (products and services wise) without accepting any of the Western values is also bad. Many people here suggest allowing side loading apps, maybe that's the answer. It'd allow some people the freedom to use iPhones with VPN but also allow Apple the plausible deniability. And Apple's walled garden approach is also criticized for other unrelated reasons so it'd help with them too.
        Clubber 9y ago
        You also have to consider China is a sovereign country with their own laws and culture. Who is Apple (or the US for that matter) to dictate what those laws or cultures are? Consider the US has many laws and practices that are considered human rights abuses domestically, much less abroad. Among these is the practice of solitary confinement, police allowed to withhold evidence during interrogation, overreaching sentencing, privacy abuses, etc. All I'm saying I guess is don't make Apple out to be a bad guy because they can't wade through that mess. I wouldn't expect them to. One thing is they seem to care more about secure devices than any other tech company I'm aware of. They aren't perfect by any means, but they've shown that they are willing to put their neck out with the San Bernandino thing and others.
- blfr 9y ago
  This problem was clearly created by the Chinese government so it's probably not the best thread for a tirade against a libertarian strawman.
  - FRex 9y ago
    It's not a fucking strawman, it's the answer of die hard capitalists to every single problem with capitalism - create a company and fix it all, "free market will dictate that the better product wins" and all that jazz. If someone can't afford food or rent that means that he didn't work hard enough for it and doesn't provide 'value'. That's die hard capitalism that enables shit like China to happen and this is all over the Western world. Human rights are 'leftist' hogwash to them and impede 'progress'. "Back when there were no human rights people had 5 or 10 children and could easily afford it!". You don't have to look far for examples: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14872564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14872564
    - humanrebar 9y ago
      That's a very particular view of history. The USSR was distinctly not capitalist and it's citizens starved to death in massive numbers. China had the Great Leap Forward. It's a straw man because nobody here thinks poor people deserve to starve to death. In fact my capitalist job allows me to pay taxes and support charities for feeding, clothing, and sheltering the poor.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
humanrebar 9y ago
Why bring up capitalism here? The censorship isn't capitalist. Apple could be a non-profit employee cooperative and still be aiding in censorship to comply with local laws.

FRex 9y ago

> No one ever said that capitalism was very aligned with human rights. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Typical answer I heard in this case is that you can create your own Apple and provide better and cheaper service and respects human rights. (No, in the eyes of mindless capitalists[1] barrier to entry doesn't exist.) [1] By that I mean people who say every single problem on Earth will be forced if only all regulations and governments are dissolved and 'free market' can 'regulate itself properly'.

humanrebar 9y ago
The phone market isn't exactly open. There is more or less a government chartered oligopoly in mobile data industry. Those companies were leveraged to create the initial consumer lock in that Apple enjoys now. Interoperability without Apple's consent is also possible but it's a government chartered monopoly on technology (copyrights, patents, bans on circumvention) that prevents that. All that being said, you're talking to straw men here. Most died in the wool free market types still see a role for the government in preventing market abuse, including fraud, monopolies, insider trading, etc.
- FRex 9y ago
  I'm not saying it's open. But clearly capitalism doesn't lead to solutions of all problems ever, as evidenced by this. But then a right winger will visit Shanghai, talk to a bunch of happy Chinese and make a YouTube video where he says that in China everyone is happy and rich while in EU your daily life is a struggle against Calais EuroTunnel stowaways or something. The only thing that allows China to do all these is political will of the people in countries that enable it. Somehow North Korea doesn't get a free pass but China does. As long as people value cheap products and ruthless 'capitalism' and 'free market' (if you can even call China that with all the governmental interference) more than rights of ordinary (i.e. not ones in central Shanghai) Chinese this will keep happening.
  - Clubber 9y ago
    So what do you want Apple to do? Leave the China market and allow a government owned phone company to take the market share? How is that scenario better for anyone in the US or China? I mean being angry that the Chinese government isn't great at human rights is one thing, but to point that anger at Apple is a bit misguided, and what do you suggest that would actually make the problem better?
    - FRex 9y ago
      I don't know. That's why it's even a problem. If there was an easy answer then Apple would just do it (or not) and there would be no discussion or dilemma to be had and we'd all applaud them or shit on them depending on if they did the right thing or not. It's a very tough problem because on one side isolating is bad and allows the oppressive governments to create 'us with them' rhetoric and replace foreign companies with domestic ones that are absolutely subservient to them, on the other, abandoning your original principles and showing that you can be part of 'the West' (products and services wise) without accepting any of the Western values is also bad. Many people here suggest allowing side loading apps, maybe that's the answer. It'd allow some people the freedom to use iPhones with VPN but also allow Apple the plausible deniability. And Apple's walled garden approach is also criticized for other unrelated reasons so it'd help with them too.
      - Clubber 9y ago
        You also have to consider China is a sovereign country with their own laws and culture. Who is Apple (or the US for that matter) to dictate what those laws or cultures are? Consider the US has many laws and practices that are considered human rights abuses domestically, much less abroad. Among these is the practice of solitary confinement, police allowed to withhold evidence during interrogation, overreaching sentencing, privacy abuses, etc. All I'm saying I guess is don't make Apple out to be a bad guy because they can't wade through that mess. I wouldn't expect them to. One thing is they seem to care more about secure devices than any other tech company I'm aware of. They aren't perfect by any means, but they've shown that they are willing to put their neck out with the San Bernandino thing and others.
blfr 9y ago
This problem was clearly created by the Chinese government so it's probably not the best thread for a tirade against a libertarian strawman.
- FRex 9y ago
  It's not a fucking strawman, it's the answer of die hard capitalists to every single problem with capitalism - create a company and fix it all, "free market will dictate that the better product wins" and all that jazz. If someone can't afford food or rent that means that he didn't work hard enough for it and doesn't provide 'value'. That's die hard capitalism that enables shit like China to happen and this is all over the Western world. Human rights are 'leftist' hogwash to them and impede 'progress'. "Back when there were no human rights people had 5 or 10 children and could easily afford it!". You don't have to look far for examples: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14872564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14872564
  - humanrebar 9y ago
    That's a very particular view of history. The USSR was distinctly not capitalist and it's citizens starved to death in massive numbers. China had the Great Leap Forward. It's a straw man because nobody here thinks poor people deserve to starve to death. In fact my capitalist job allows me to pay taxes and support charities for feeding, clothing, and sheltering the poor.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]

humanrebar 9y ago

Why bring up capitalism here? The censorship isn't capitalist. Apple could be a non-profit employee cooperative and still be aiding in censorship to comply with local laws.