5 ms·

Apple paid protection money. Pretty simple, no need to sugar coat it

• chrischen 5y ago
  That’s what all government is: a racket.
  • ethanbond 5y ago
    Life before nationstates was famously prosperous, safe, and enriching.
    • cdot2 5y ago
      The agricultural revolution and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race?
      • bostonsre 5y ago
        Which agricultural revolution? If the earliest, sure more food is good, but having to fear being wiped off the earth from random raiders or armies kind of sucks.
        • cdot2 5y ago
          States require administrators by definition and administrators require food surplus or they would starve. I know there were some hunter gatherers who had small food surpluses but I dont think there was anything that could remotely be called a state This guy edited his comment. He originally asked if there were states before agriculture
        • Eelongate 5y ago
          > Which agricultural revolution? Don't take it too literally, his comment is a modified quote from the unabomber's manifesto, which opens with, "The industrial revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race." It's something of a meme to swap out "industrial" with something else, usually with a tongue-in-cheek intent.
          • cdot2 5y ago
            Someone got my reference
      • cm2012 5y ago
        Contrary to popular internet belief, hunter gatherer life sucked way worse.
        • breakfastduck 5y ago
          There is absolutely no way at all to verify that claim - considering 'better/worse' entirely depends on the happiness of those individuals. Something we have no way of measuring.
          • ivalm 5y ago
            Something like 30% remains from pre-agricultural sites show signs of violent death... sure not a measure of happiness but i'll take safety for starters.
            • munificent 5y ago
              It's unclear how reliable statistics like these are, and the picture of how violent and/or war-like pre-agricultural humans were is very far from clear: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/how-humans-tamed-themselves/580447/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/how-hum... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/war-is-not-part-of-human-nature/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/war-is-not-part-o... https://www.wired.com/2013/07/to-war-is-human-perhaps-not/ https://www.wired.com/2013/07/to-war-is-human-perhaps-not/
          • colinmhayes 5y ago
            https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction people have never been happier
            • breakfastduck 5y ago
              That data comes from 1970s onward. So totally not at all what we were talking about.
    • juuular 5y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dawn_of_Everything https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dawn_of_Everything
  • dang 5y ago
    Please don't post unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
• bell-cot 5y ago
  That I am aware of, "protection money" clearly implies that the payments are to a criminal organization - which is separate from, and unauthorized by, the established state. The MacRumors story seems very clear that Apple and Mr. Cook's deal was with the Chinese government, and the ruling Chinese Communist Party. Do you have information to the contrary? Or is your point merely to voice anger at China, the CCP, Apple, and/or Mr. Cook?
  • TimTheTinker 5y ago
    > criminal organization - which is separate from, and unauthorized by, the established state When the government of an established state violates human rights and international law (like the Geneva Convention), I don't think it's incorrect to call that government a criminal organization.
    • LudwigNagasena 5y ago
      So the US is a criminal organization.
      • TimTheTinker 5y ago
        On what basis?
  • tshaddox 5y ago
    > That I am aware of, "protection money" clearly implies that the payments are to a criminal organization - which is separate from, and unauthorized by, the established state. The phrase is also very commonly used to refer to money paid to government officials who are corrupt. One could still quibble over whether this is technically “corruption” since it might very well be totally legal and encouraged under Chinese law, but I think the usage of the phrase here is quite suitable.
  • kumarvvr 5y ago
    When politicians use their power to threaten and block access to markets, the behavior is no different from that of a criminal gang. Using power to gain unfair advantage. So yes, this is protection money / bribe.