7 ms·

Explain China then. Apple is being hypocritical in this case. Giving in to the demands of government when it hurts their business ( if it did take privacy as s

Explain China then. Apple is being hypocritical in this case. Giving in to the demands of government when it hurts their business ( if it did take privacy as seriously as HN makes it out to be, they would take a stand in China) while advocating privacy in Western world.

Jerry2 8y ago
Like every business operating in China, Apple has to comply with local laws. And that's what they do. Everyone else who operates in China complies with them as well. Apple also complies with US laws and laws of EU.
- ghostly_s 8y ago
  Operating in China is a choice every one of these companies makes.
DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
I can’t be the only person tired of this canard, right? It’s said over and over that the benefit of Apple is an alignment of incentives in Western markets. That is to say, Apple is not faux-idealistic, they are capitalistic, and in most places that aligns with user goals. China is the exception, but for the same reasons.
Someone1234 8y ago
Explain what with China? Apple are legally required to follow the law of countries they do business in. In China the law requires that the government, not third party apps, gains access to additional information. Apple can limit third party app privacy violations while still following the law. The only stand Apple could take here is: - Stop selling in China - Have executives go to jail Just as if they violated US law or EU-member's law.
- notyourday 8y ago
  So what you are saying that Apple's core beliefs are location-dependent. Personally, I think it is totally cool to have location-dependent core beliefs. I just think it is a total fan-boism not to acknowledge it.
  - abc_lisper 8y ago
    Umm. No. I don’t wear the same clothes in a desert and a forest. To do so would be foolish. Imposing yourself on others when you have no power to do is not wise. I can keep my house clean but can’t expect everyone in my neighborhood to do so.
    - ams6110 8y ago
      But you can choose not to visit the dirty houses. Apple could choose to honor principles and not sell in China. But market share is more important. This is a similar argument we had a couple decades ago about companies doing business in South Africa, which at the time had official racial segregation policies (Apartheid). There was a popular push for divestment and it was fairly successful.
      - FussyZeus 8y ago
        > Apple could choose to honor principles and not sell in China. But market share is more important. They're a corporation, their sole ethic is "to make money," full stop, that is the only reason Apple exists. To ignore China as a market would cost them millions if not billions of dollars. Tons of businesses with very ethical practices operate in and with China. China's current anti-privacy stances are unfortunate, but if we refuse to do business with them, all we're doing is giving a leg-up to Chinese corporations who don't even pretend to care about user privacy in the form of an insulated market.
        notyourday 8y ago
        I'm glad you are starting to acknowledge that Apple will sell its users for money. It is just for now it seems to have other venues to get that money. Except in China where it needs to sell its users to the government in order to be able to extract money from that market right now.
- ksk 8y ago
  That is a poor argument. "Selling" a product is not a principle or a virtue that one is required to comply with. Protecting the privacy of users is. Being non-discriminatory is. What if they had to do business in a country that forbids gay people from working? Using your logic - "Oh well they had to fire all their gay employees to just follow the law". Its hypocritical of Apple to suggest they truly care about privacy other than as a means to simply differentiate themselves to sell some more shiny objects - which might well be a common cutthroat business tactic.
  - osteele 8y ago
    Any good act by a corporation can be explained away as a business strategy. Just as any good act by an individual can be explained away as a means to garner status, or because the individual derives personal satisfaction from either the act or the effects of good behavior. Are you arguing that one must always impute manipulative motives to a corporation? (And should therefore not reward consequentially better behavior, because it must be based on invalid motives?) Or is your point that Apple is uniquely hypocritical? If so, on what evidence about Apple in particular?
    - ksk 8y ago
      >Any good act by a corporation can be explained away as a business strategy. Just as any good act by an individual can be explained away as a means to garner status, or because the individual derives personal satisfaction from either the act or the effects of good behavior. Sure, I would agree that if the outcome is good, then the intention is not relevant. Apple might have a positive effect in China despite compromising on privacy. >Are you arguing that one must always impute manipulative motives to a corporation? (And should therefore not reward consequentially better behavior, because it must be based on invalid motives?) I'm saying recognize the hypocrisy instead of constructing weird arguments to justify it. >Or is your point that Apple is uniquely hypocritical? (And if so, on what evidence? Certainly not. I said its a common business tactic.
      - osteele 8y ago
- hesarenu 8y ago
  If they were serious they would stop selling in China.
fiblye 8y ago
With China, there's literally no option aside from having their products being barred from being sold or manufactured there. The fact they're standing up for user rights when given a legal possibility is a good sign, compared to most major companies which are harvesting anything and everything even going beyond the scope of what's legally permissible.
hungerstrike 8y ago
Apple is just like any other western company - their shareholders and chiefs don't really give a fuck about privacy. They only care about their bottom line. If China demanded that someone from your company sacrifice a new-born baby in order to do business there, I'm positive that we'd still have many, many western companies doing business in China.
- SiempreViernes 8y ago
  Maybe some startups would even go to the trouble of getting late aborted featus classified as "new-born" and spin it as an "ethics enhanced feature".

Jerry2 8y ago

Like every business operating in China, Apple has to comply with local laws. And that's what they do. Everyone else who operates in China complies with them as well. Apple also complies with US laws and laws of EU.

ghostly_s 8y ago
Operating in China is a choice every one of these companies makes.

DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago

I can’t be the only person tired of this canard, right? It’s said over and over that the benefit of Apple is an alignment of incentives in Western markets. That is to say, Apple is not faux-idealistic, they are capitalistic, and in most places that aligns with user goals. China is the exception, but for the same reasons.

Someone1234 8y ago

Explain what with China? Apple are legally required to follow the law of countries they do business in. In China the law requires that the government, not third party apps, gains access to additional information. Apple can limit third party app privacy violations while still following the law. The only stand Apple could take here is: - Stop selling in China - Have executives go to jail Just as if they violated US law or EU-member's law.

notyourday 8y ago
So what you are saying that Apple's core beliefs are location-dependent. Personally, I think it is totally cool to have location-dependent core beliefs. I just think it is a total fan-boism not to acknowledge it.
- abc_lisper 8y ago
  Umm. No. I don’t wear the same clothes in a desert and a forest. To do so would be foolish. Imposing yourself on others when you have no power to do is not wise. I can keep my house clean but can’t expect everyone in my neighborhood to do so.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    But you can choose not to visit the dirty houses. Apple could choose to honor principles and not sell in China. But market share is more important. This is a similar argument we had a couple decades ago about companies doing business in South Africa, which at the time had official racial segregation policies (Apartheid). There was a popular push for divestment and it was fairly successful.
    - FussyZeus 8y ago
      > Apple could choose to honor principles and not sell in China. But market share is more important. They're a corporation, their sole ethic is "to make money," full stop, that is the only reason Apple exists. To ignore China as a market would cost them millions if not billions of dollars. Tons of businesses with very ethical practices operate in and with China. China's current anti-privacy stances are unfortunate, but if we refuse to do business with them, all we're doing is giving a leg-up to Chinese corporations who don't even pretend to care about user privacy in the form of an insulated market.
      - notyourday 8y ago
        I'm glad you are starting to acknowledge that Apple will sell its users for money. It is just for now it seems to have other venues to get that money. Except in China where it needs to sell its users to the government in order to be able to extract money from that market right now.
ksk 8y ago
That is a poor argument. "Selling" a product is not a principle or a virtue that one is required to comply with. Protecting the privacy of users is. Being non-discriminatory is. What if they had to do business in a country that forbids gay people from working? Using your logic - "Oh well they had to fire all their gay employees to just follow the law". Its hypocritical of Apple to suggest they truly care about privacy other than as a means to simply differentiate themselves to sell some more shiny objects - which might well be a common cutthroat business tactic.
- osteele 8y ago
  Any good act by a corporation can be explained away as a business strategy. Just as any good act by an individual can be explained away as a means to garner status, or because the individual derives personal satisfaction from either the act or the effects of good behavior. Are you arguing that one must always impute manipulative motives to a corporation? (And should therefore not reward consequentially better behavior, because it must be based on invalid motives?) Or is your point that Apple is uniquely hypocritical? If so, on what evidence about Apple in particular?
  - ksk 8y ago
    >Any good act by a corporation can be explained away as a business strategy. Just as any good act by an individual can be explained away as a means to garner status, or because the individual derives personal satisfaction from either the act or the effects of good behavior. Sure, I would agree that if the outcome is good, then the intention is not relevant. Apple might have a positive effect in China despite compromising on privacy. >Are you arguing that one must always impute manipulative motives to a corporation? (And should therefore not reward consequentially better behavior, because it must be based on invalid motives?) I'm saying recognize the hypocrisy instead of constructing weird arguments to justify it. >Or is your point that Apple is uniquely hypocritical? (And if so, on what evidence? Certainly not. I said its a common business tactic.
    - osteele 8y ago
hesarenu 8y ago
If they were serious they would stop selling in China.

fiblye 8y ago

With China, there's literally no option aside from having their products being barred from being sold or manufactured there. The fact they're standing up for user rights when given a legal possibility is a good sign, compared to most major companies which are harvesting anything and everything even going beyond the scope of what's legally permissible.

hungerstrike 8y ago

Apple is just like any other western company - their shareholders and chiefs don't really give a fuck about privacy. They only care about their bottom line. If China demanded that someone from your company sacrifice a new-born baby in order to do business there, I'm positive that we'd still have many, many western companies doing business in China.

SiempreViernes 8y ago
Maybe some startups would even go to the trouble of getting late aborted featus classified as "new-born" and spin it as an "ethics enhanced feature".