5 ms·

Is technological lock-in, or "hostility" toward a user as you put it, an ethical issue? I would think the use of Chinese labor abuses to make iPhones is the et

Is technological lock-in, or "hostility" toward a user as you put it, an ethical issue? I would think the use of Chinese labor abuses to make iPhones is the ethical issue. Funny you didn't mention that.

skinnymuch 5y ago
Wouldn’t be able to go with pretty much any one then. Probably wouldn’t be able to wear much of your clothing either if labor abuse is an issue.
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  Gustin and Everlane. These two clothing companies provide 100% transparency on their sourcing and labor practices. You absolutely can choose to wear clothing that doesn't enslave people. Maybe not 100% (shoes are still difficult to source), but it doesn't mean throwing your hands up and walking away. Or being cynical toward someone who is trying.
  - skinnymuch 5y ago
    Sorry if you do, do that. I’m almost every other case, people are not consistent with this sort of stuff. I was wrong with the way I wrote my comment and my attitude.
olliej 5y ago
Apple has the strongest protections against unethical labor of any tech company. The main reason we know of any issues is because apple is literally the only company that audits and publishes the results of supplier audits. If you think that somehow the people working on apple hardware construction are treated worse than the people working on the vastly higher number of android devices, etc you need to provide some evidence. I recall a case where apple audits found a supplier using child labour, included that in their report, included the remediation (including cases where they outright dropped suppliers). The headlines weren’t “apple found child labour and stopped it”. The headlines were “apple uses child labour”. The reason you don’t get that for other manufacturers is that they a) don’t audit, and b) don’t publish details even if they somehow become aware.
DoctorOW 5y ago
Yes, but if one used that as their moral standard they wouldn't be able to purchase anything made by an international company. It's really easy to bash iPhone on things they do exclusively, but harder on industry practice.
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  Wrong. You are making the "all or nothing" fallacy. You absolutely can make the ethical choice when you have the choice. In some cases, you are simply forced to make the lesser evil choice. Transparency is the first step. Yes, in some cases it is unavoidable, but to translate that into overall inaction, IMHO, is lazy.
  - DoctorOW 5y ago
    That's reductive of my point. The overall being one's choices for a new smartphone are iPhone, Android, or abstain. When the parent comment elected Android for "ethical" reasons those reasons would not include the labor conditions of the phone's manufacture since that doesn't vary between most Apple and Android phones.
    - SavantIdiot 5y ago
      > That's reductive of my point. > they wouldn't be able to purchase anything made by an international company I suggest you don't make sweeping generalizations, then. > The overall being one's choices for a new smartphone are iPhone, Android, or abstain. That's why I took care to point out "In some cases, you are simply forced to make the lesser evil choice." > When the parent comment elected Android for "ethical" reasons those reasons would not include the labor conditions of the phone's manufacture since that doesn't vary between most Apple and Android phones. You're not allowing for someone to still consider the ethics of an issue: it's not like subtraction, if A has it and B has it than neither have it, so why consider it. IMO that's reductive. It can still be considered.
      - DoctorOW 5y ago

skinnymuch 5y ago

Wouldn’t be able to go with pretty much any one then. Probably wouldn’t be able to wear much of your clothing either if labor abuse is an issue.

SavantIdiot 5y ago
Gustin and Everlane. These two clothing companies provide 100% transparency on their sourcing and labor practices. You absolutely can choose to wear clothing that doesn't enslave people. Maybe not 100% (shoes are still difficult to source), but it doesn't mean throwing your hands up and walking away. Or being cynical toward someone who is trying.
- skinnymuch 5y ago
  Sorry if you do, do that. I’m almost every other case, people are not consistent with this sort of stuff. I was wrong with the way I wrote my comment and my attitude.

olliej 5y ago

Apple has the strongest protections against unethical labor of any tech company. The main reason we know of any issues is because apple is literally the only company that audits and publishes the results of supplier audits. If you think that somehow the people working on apple hardware construction are treated worse than the people working on the vastly higher number of android devices, etc you need to provide some evidence. I recall a case where apple audits found a supplier using child labour, included that in their report, included the remediation (including cases where they outright dropped suppliers). The headlines weren’t “apple found child labour and stopped it”. The headlines were “apple uses child labour”. The reason you don’t get that for other manufacturers is that they a) don’t audit, and b) don’t publish details even if they somehow become aware.

DoctorOW 5y ago

Yes, but if one used that as their moral standard they wouldn't be able to purchase anything made by an international company. It's really easy to bash iPhone on things they do exclusively, but harder on industry practice.

SavantIdiot 5y ago
Wrong. You are making the "all or nothing" fallacy. You absolutely can make the ethical choice when you have the choice. In some cases, you are simply forced to make the lesser evil choice. Transparency is the first step. Yes, in some cases it is unavoidable, but to translate that into overall inaction, IMHO, is lazy.
- DoctorOW 5y ago
  That's reductive of my point. The overall being one's choices for a new smartphone are iPhone, Android, or abstain. When the parent comment elected Android for "ethical" reasons those reasons would not include the labor conditions of the phone's manufacture since that doesn't vary between most Apple and Android phones.
  - SavantIdiot 5y ago
    > That's reductive of my point. > they wouldn't be able to purchase anything made by an international company I suggest you don't make sweeping generalizations, then. > The overall being one's choices for a new smartphone are iPhone, Android, or abstain. That's why I took care to point out "In some cases, you are simply forced to make the lesser evil choice." > When the parent comment elected Android for "ethical" reasons those reasons would not include the labor conditions of the phone's manufacture since that doesn't vary between most Apple and Android phones. You're not allowing for someone to still consider the ethics of an issue: it's not like subtraction, if A has it and B has it than neither have it, so why consider it. IMO that's reductive. It can still be considered.
    - DoctorOW 5y ago