3 ms·

It looks like this news article goes into more depth: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chinese-authorities-apple-ceo-signed-275-billion-de

It looks like this news article goes into more depth: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chinese-authorities-apple-ceo-signed-275-billion-deal-with-them https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chine...

1cvmask 5y ago
I saw that article and decided not to post it as it is completely behind a paywall and I couldn't read it first myself. The other problem is that The Information is quite a SV insiders PR machine usually posting fluff pieces masquerading as news. The WSJ usually is one of the few adversarial critical media outlets in SV and has broken stories like Theranos etc.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  I’m also a bit skeptical of the timing of the article as this “news” is about a contract that, coincidentally, is about to expire: > If there were no objections from either side, the deal would be automatically be extended for an additional year until May 2022, according to the agreement. I would imagine they’re currently in negotiations for whatever the next iteration of this agreement will be. Perhaps Mr. Cook is looking for a bit of leverage?
dang 5y ago
The Information hard-walls its articles so they're not on topic here, unfortunately. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  While I understand and agree with the rule, it's funny that the banned hard-walled article goes into more depth than the Reuters article that's allowed.
  - dang 5y ago
    That's what happens when good content is hardwalled. I wouldn't say the Reuters article is allowed, exactly. At present it contains no information beyond the title, so I've downweighted it. That doesn't mean we're about to ban Reuters.
    - tablespoon 5y ago
      This version seems to have a bit more information: https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-china-idCAKBN2IM1HH https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-china-idCAKBN2IM1HH > The five-year agreement was made when Cook made visits to China in 2016 to quash a host of regulatory action against the company, the report said, citing interviews and internal Apple documents. > Cook lobbied Chinese officials, who believed the company was not contributing enough to the local economy, and signed the agreement with a Chinese government agency, making concessions to Beijing and winning key legal exemptions, the report added. > Some of Apple’s investment in China would go toward building new retail stores, research and development centers and renewable energy projects, the report said, citing the agreement.... > As part of the agreement, Apple promised to use more components from Chinese suppliers in its devices, sign deals with Chinese software firms, collaborate on technology with Chinese universities and directly invest in Chinese tech companies, the Information report said. It looks like it was published two minutes after the one in the OP. I've noticed Reuters tends to rush stuff out then issue a new articles when they have new information to report. Sometimes it's just a report that some other outlet reported something. I think they do this because they're tailoring their content to financial terminal subscribers, who'd benefit from a bare bones headline that comes a few minutes early, so they can trade on the news.
tablespoon 5y ago
> It looks like this news article goes into more depth: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chinese-authorities-apple-ceo-signed-275-billion-deal-with-them https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chine... >> Interviews and internal Apple documents provide a behind-the-scenes look at how the company made concessions to Beijing and won key legal exemptions. CEO Tim Cook personally lobbied officials over threats that would have hobbled its devices and services. His interventions paved the way for Apple’s unparalleled success in the country. Is this related to the similar stuff the NY Times reported on in May? https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-censorship-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-ce...: > Internal Apple documents reviewed by The New York Times, interviews with 17 current and former Apple employees and four security experts, and new filings made in a court case in the United States last week provide rare insight into the compromises Mr. Cook has made to do business in China. They offer an extensive inside look — many aspects of which have never been reported before — at how Apple has given in to escalating demands from the Chinese authorities. Putting two and two together, it I'm guessing this is a story is about Tim Cook pledging Apple will spend billions to develop the Chinese economy, probably while simultaneously claiming it couldn't spend similar money to develop the US economy or manufacturing capacity.

1cvmask 5y ago

I saw that article and decided not to post it as it is completely behind a paywall and I couldn't read it first myself. The other problem is that The Information is quite a SV insiders PR machine usually posting fluff pieces masquerading as news. The WSJ usually is one of the few adversarial critical media outlets in SV and has broken stories like Theranos etc.

elliekelly 5y ago
I’m also a bit skeptical of the timing of the article as this “news” is about a contract that, coincidentally, is about to expire: > If there were no objections from either side, the deal would be automatically be extended for an additional year until May 2022, according to the agreement. I would imagine they’re currently in negotiations for whatever the next iteration of this agreement will be. Perhaps Mr. Cook is looking for a bit of leverage?

dang 5y ago

The Information hard-walls its articles so they're not on topic here, unfortunately. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

boomboomsubban 5y ago
While I understand and agree with the rule, it's funny that the banned hard-walled article goes into more depth than the Reuters article that's allowed.
- dang 5y ago
  That's what happens when good content is hardwalled. I wouldn't say the Reuters article is allowed, exactly. At present it contains no information beyond the title, so I've downweighted it. That doesn't mean we're about to ban Reuters.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    This version seems to have a bit more information: https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-china-idCAKBN2IM1HH https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-china-idCAKBN2IM1HH > The five-year agreement was made when Cook made visits to China in 2016 to quash a host of regulatory action against the company, the report said, citing interviews and internal Apple documents. > Cook lobbied Chinese officials, who believed the company was not contributing enough to the local economy, and signed the agreement with a Chinese government agency, making concessions to Beijing and winning key legal exemptions, the report added. > Some of Apple’s investment in China would go toward building new retail stores, research and development centers and renewable energy projects, the report said, citing the agreement.... > As part of the agreement, Apple promised to use more components from Chinese suppliers in its devices, sign deals with Chinese software firms, collaborate on technology with Chinese universities and directly invest in Chinese tech companies, the Information report said. It looks like it was published two minutes after the one in the OP. I've noticed Reuters tends to rush stuff out then issue a new articles when they have new information to report. Sometimes it's just a report that some other outlet reported something. I think they do this because they're tailoring their content to financial terminal subscribers, who'd benefit from a bare bones headline that comes a few minutes early, so they can trade on the news.

tablespoon 5y ago

> It looks like this news article goes into more depth: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chinese-authorities-apple-ceo-signed-275-billion-deal-with-them https://www.theinformation.com/articles/facing-hostile-chine... >> Interviews and internal Apple documents provide a behind-the-scenes look at how the company made concessions to Beijing and won key legal exemptions. CEO Tim Cook personally lobbied officials over threats that would have hobbled its devices and services. His interventions paved the way for Apple’s unparalleled success in the country. Is this related to the similar stuff the NY Times reported on in May? https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-censorship-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-ce...: > Internal Apple documents reviewed by The New York Times, interviews with 17 current and former Apple employees and four security experts, and new filings made in a court case in the United States last week provide rare insight into the compromises Mr. Cook has made to do business in China. They offer an extensive inside look — many aspects of which have never been reported before — at how Apple has given in to escalating demands from the Chinese authorities. Putting two and two together, it I'm guessing this is a story is about Tim Cook pledging Apple will spend billions to develop the Chinese economy, probably while simultaneously claiming it couldn't spend similar money to develop the US economy or manufacturing capacity.