4 ms·

> Apple has a business to run. "Apple" is not some abstract entity. There are people behind Apple (the shareholders, the managers, the employees). Real people,

> Apple has a business to run. "Apple" is not some abstract entity. There are people behind Apple (the shareholders, the managers, the employees). Real people, with real morals and values. I don't think that the only thing all of them care about is "running a business" and that all of them feel it absolves them from acting humanly. It's more complicated than that. (having said that, of course, greed is always strong).

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
Apple has an actual fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. And via survival bias, companies that act purely morally simply cease to exist as they are out competed by companies that focus on profit instead. Such entities simply can't survive via capitalism without, perhaps, government regulation that ensures everyone is playing with the same set of rules.
- Eelongate 5y ago
  > Apple has an actual fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. That fiduciary responsibility meme needs to die already. The flimsiest business justification is enough to cover company leadership's ass. Instead of "We refuse to do business with China because it's immoral" they need merely say "because we believe it's in the long term strategic interests of the company."
  - ShroudedNight 5y ago
    Furthermore, this has already come up in the past for Apple: When pressed about the financial prudence of prioritizing environmental outcomes Tim Cook snapped: "When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don't consider the bloody ROI." It was also not limited to accessibility, but applicable to many areas Apple desires to lead. The conclusion is that Apple is explicitly not interested in prioritizing individual liberty.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    > That fiduciary responsibility meme needs to die already. Again, stop it. The companies you want exist, they just go insolvent before you ever notice them. If you want to change the way the companies operate, you have to change the system, you can't just expect companies to "do the right thing" in an environment that penalizes them for that. You can't have the free market cake and eat the ideological high ground at the same time.
    - Eelongate 5y ago
      You take me for what, a libertarian? Do you think you know me? I never said anything about wanting a "free market cake." Regardless, nothing you said refutes me. "Fiduciary responsibility" does not legally compel Apple to do business in China. If anything, such misconceptions about fiduciary duty are espoused by libertarians online, not rebuked by them.
      - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
        My point was that if Apple didn't adhere to maximizing profits, they simply wouldn't exist and we wouldn't be talking about their behavior in China. Regardless of whether you are a libertarian or not, you are wagging your finger at the wrong party (or to say, the party isn't really in a position to fix things). If you want change, it has to be via whoever is setting/enforcing the rules (in our case, government). The USA, ironically unlike China, doesn't really have the framework to force companies to adhere to some kind of moral code (outside of national security, etc...). And even if we go down that rabbit hole, we just become more like China with some kind of state mandated moral code that can be easily perverted...maybe we can't really win on this.
        stale2002 5y ago
        Yeah they would exist. Lots of companies are able to exist without giving in to completely silly demands like "increase the size of these islands". > If you want change Actually, customers are able to cause lots of economic damages to companies, or their employees. There is more that one way to Target Apple employees than what you suggested.
- lgrialn 5y ago
  The evil corporation writes the law "requiring" it to behave evilly, and their pet legislature passes it.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > purely morally Must they be pure or completely evil? Companies have many focuses, including profit, of course, and also morality. Look at the behaviors of the world's leading companies. They need to survive and operate in society, not a Darwinian cleanroom, and they will lose a lot of customers, employees, investors, sympathetic elected officials, and more if they act like objectivists.
ksec 5y ago
>There are people behind Apple I think that is precisely why this has been leaked. Some people inside Apple obviously are fed up with what Apple is doing. I would imagine especially those working in operation and supply chain. There were lots of signs this was happening since 2016 if you are watching Apple supply chain over the years. But it is the first time we got some sort of evidence.
pjmlp 5y ago
Like the same people that buy products knownligy that they were produced in China, and when given the option will always go for the cheaper version instead of the moral one?

seanmcdirmid 5y ago

Apple has an actual fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. And via survival bias, companies that act purely morally simply cease to exist as they are out competed by companies that focus on profit instead. Such entities simply can't survive via capitalism without, perhaps, government regulation that ensures everyone is playing with the same set of rules.

Eelongate 5y ago
> Apple has an actual fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. That fiduciary responsibility meme needs to die already. The flimsiest business justification is enough to cover company leadership's ass. Instead of "We refuse to do business with China because it's immoral" they need merely say "because we believe it's in the long term strategic interests of the company."
- ShroudedNight 5y ago
  Furthermore, this has already come up in the past for Apple: When pressed about the financial prudence of prioritizing environmental outcomes Tim Cook snapped: "When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don't consider the bloody ROI." It was also not limited to accessibility, but applicable to many areas Apple desires to lead. The conclusion is that Apple is explicitly not interested in prioritizing individual liberty.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  > That fiduciary responsibility meme needs to die already. Again, stop it. The companies you want exist, they just go insolvent before you ever notice them. If you want to change the way the companies operate, you have to change the system, you can't just expect companies to "do the right thing" in an environment that penalizes them for that. You can't have the free market cake and eat the ideological high ground at the same time.
  - Eelongate 5y ago
    You take me for what, a libertarian? Do you think you know me? I never said anything about wanting a "free market cake." Regardless, nothing you said refutes me. "Fiduciary responsibility" does not legally compel Apple to do business in China. If anything, such misconceptions about fiduciary duty are espoused by libertarians online, not rebuked by them.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      My point was that if Apple didn't adhere to maximizing profits, they simply wouldn't exist and we wouldn't be talking about their behavior in China. Regardless of whether you are a libertarian or not, you are wagging your finger at the wrong party (or to say, the party isn't really in a position to fix things). If you want change, it has to be via whoever is setting/enforcing the rules (in our case, government). The USA, ironically unlike China, doesn't really have the framework to force companies to adhere to some kind of moral code (outside of national security, etc...). And even if we go down that rabbit hole, we just become more like China with some kind of state mandated moral code that can be easily perverted...maybe we can't really win on this.
      - stale2002 5y ago
        Yeah they would exist. Lots of companies are able to exist without giving in to completely silly demands like "increase the size of these islands". > If you want change Actually, customers are able to cause lots of economic damages to companies, or their employees. There is more that one way to Target Apple employees than what you suggested.
lgrialn 5y ago
The evil corporation writes the law "requiring" it to behave evilly, and their pet legislature passes it.
wolverine876 5y ago
> purely morally Must they be pure or completely evil? Companies have many focuses, including profit, of course, and also morality. Look at the behaviors of the world's leading companies. They need to survive and operate in society, not a Darwinian cleanroom, and they will lose a lot of customers, employees, investors, sympathetic elected officials, and more if they act like objectivists.

ksec 5y ago

>There are people behind Apple I think that is precisely why this has been leaked. Some people inside Apple obviously are fed up with what Apple is doing. I would imagine especially those working in operation and supply chain. There were lots of signs this was happening since 2016 if you are watching Apple supply chain over the years. But it is the first time we got some sort of evidence.

pjmlp 5y ago

Like the same people that buy products knownligy that they were produced in China, and when given the option will always go for the cheaper version instead of the moral one?