4 ms·

What on earth are you talking about? Of course people can be mad at Apple specifically for the reasons already outlined: 1. This is a long term pattern of beh

by mhoad 5y ago

What on earth are you talking about? Of course people can be mad at Apple specifically for the reasons already outlined: 1. This is a long term pattern of behaviour from them. 2. They promised they would fix it. While everyone seems to agree that as the largest company in the world they are entirely capable of doing that the fact is they didn’t. 3. There is zero chance that any of this is happening without their knowledge. That excuse worked the first time but not now. Anyone who fits that pattern is of course fair game but don’t pull that kind of nonsense where unless you criticise everything that is wrong in tech supply chains than you are secretly “just a hater”. If you claim that we should hold Apple to account for their word how exactly do you suggest we go about change?

quesera 5y ago
I think you have an oversimplified view of very complicated problems. 1. The long-term pattern of behavior from Apple is to work with manufacturers in developing countries. And to write in very specific requirements for worker treatment into contracts. And to audit facilities, and shut them down when not compliant. And to have Apple staff on-site at those facilities. They do not see everything, and they do not prevent everything. But they do make more, and a more visible effort than anyone else. 2. Apple cannot "fix" the woes of the developing world, certainly not alone, and certainly not immediately. Even with the cooperation of foreign corporations, with Amazon and Microsoft and Dell who all work with the same partners. Even with the cooperation of foreign governments (local, regional, national), who are of course never ever corrupt, and never look the other way when a sub-sub-sub-contractor does a crappy job. Perfection is not happening. The proper questions are: Is Apple leading the way for improving things for workers? And are they doing enough to improve things such that additional doings would have only marginal effects? Clearly the answers are YES and maybe. My opinion of the latter "maybe" is more like "probably" because I'm biased to believe that the people who run Apple recognize the moral and economic value in doing so. Obviously you disagree on that, but you are no more objectively correct than I. 3. You honestly believe that someone in Apple was aware of tainted food being served to workers, and decided "eh, who cares?"?? Honestly? I think that would say more about you than it would about Apple.
- evilduck 5y ago
  Likewise, if we want to solve an industry-wide or global labor ethics problems we need industry wide or global solutions. Tariffs, taxes, regulation, trade agreements and embargoes solve these scale of problems and we do it all the time. Make it an even playing field across the industry and make it more expensive to do the wrong things and force externalized costs to be part of the price. Apple fucks up, but it seems entirely unrealistic to expect a company to voluntarily put themselves at a competitive disadvantage, to give up profit, and to make everything harder and more expensive for themselves just because they're a big player in the market. That gets the exact results we see, instead of the solution we want. Let's try to solve the problem and let's line up Apple to be first in line for inspection, but it can't be a line of just one company if we expect actual results otherwise we're just going to shift around the problem instead of solving it. It's not like Google and Microsoft are small scrappy startups looking for a moonshot, they're chomping at the bit to take marketshare away from Apple and they're both already in bed with Foxconn too.

by mhoad 5y ago

quesera 5y ago

I think you have an oversimplified view of very complicated problems. 1. The long-term pattern of behavior from Apple is to work with manufacturers in developing countries. And to write in very specific requirements for worker treatment into contracts. And to audit facilities, and shut them down when not compliant. And to have Apple staff on-site at those facilities. They do not see everything, and they do not prevent everything. But they do make more, and a more visible effort than anyone else. 2. Apple cannot "fix" the woes of the developing world, certainly not alone, and certainly not immediately. Even with the cooperation of foreign corporations, with Amazon and Microsoft and Dell who all work with the same partners. Even with the cooperation of foreign governments (local, regional, national), who are of course never ever corrupt, and never look the other way when a sub-sub-sub-contractor does a crappy job. Perfection is not happening. The proper questions are: Is Apple leading the way for improving things for workers? And are they doing enough to improve things such that additional doings would have only marginal effects? Clearly the answers are YES and maybe. My opinion of the latter "maybe" is more like "probably" because I'm biased to believe that the people who run Apple recognize the moral and economic value in doing so. Obviously you disagree on that, but you are no more objectively correct than I. 3. You honestly believe that someone in Apple was aware of tainted food being served to workers, and decided "eh, who cares?"?? Honestly? I think that would say more about you than it would about Apple.

evilduck 5y ago
Likewise, if we want to solve an industry-wide or global labor ethics problems we need industry wide or global solutions. Tariffs, taxes, regulation, trade agreements and embargoes solve these scale of problems and we do it all the time. Make it an even playing field across the industry and make it more expensive to do the wrong things and force externalized costs to be part of the price. Apple fucks up, but it seems entirely unrealistic to expect a company to voluntarily put themselves at a competitive disadvantage, to give up profit, and to make everything harder and more expensive for themselves just because they're a big player in the market. That gets the exact results we see, instead of the solution we want. Let's try to solve the problem and let's line up Apple to be first in line for inspection, but it can't be a line of just one company if we expect actual results otherwise we're just going to shift around the problem instead of solving it. It's not like Google and Microsoft are small scrappy startups looking for a moonshot, they're chomping at the bit to take marketshare away from Apple and they're both already in bed with Foxconn too.