4 ms·
> "Please, they're a electronics designer. They contract with whoever bids lowest, and always have." Do you have a cite for your claim that Apple has never bee
by nirvana 15y ago
> "Please, they're a electronics designer. They contract with whoever bids lowest, and always have."
Do you have a cite for your claim that Apple has never been holding their producers up to a standard of quality, and has been entering into contracts on the SOLE basis of price? Of course you don't, as this is just an ideological statement, already refuted by my pointing out their history of audits and high requirements.
> "One of the big reason Foxconn is so large now is precisely because they were the low bidder for Apple's business years ago."
One of the reasons Foxconn was a relatively low bidder all those years ago was because in their partnership with Apple they acquired a great deal of knowledge about how to build products to Apple's exacting standards, and how to run a large business employing large numbers of employees and treat them well. This has, in fact, allowed Foxconn to grow to a very large business, and might be the one thing that separated them from the pack of contract manufacturers that came about at that time-- many of whom offered lower prices and were competing solely on price.
>But to flip this around and claim that Apple is somehow a champion fighting for workers rights is ... just weird
Actually, no flipping is involved. It is a simple statement of fact. Apple has been auditing its suppliers going back decades and including inside china since it started manufacturing there.
>"makes me sad to see this kind of completely unselfaware fawning on a site where discussion used to be a lot more intellectually robust"
Frankly, it makes me sad to see people who cannot make an argument, cannot respond to the argument that has been made, and instead are only able to misrepresent the argument and engage in the kind of ad hominem you just have. There is zero "intellectual robustness" in your response, as your response comes completely from your mindless hatred of Apple. This is why the site is in such decline-- simply mentioning anything positive about Apple (or other chosen targets of hatred) or negative about Google or Amazon (or other chosen targets of adoration) results in down votes and these kind of mindless snotty responses.
> Like the rest of the industry, Apple didn't do poop about chinese workers until they were embarrassed.
This is a flat out lie. But you believe it because others with the same ideology as you have said it, and so you just assert it here, comfortable that the down vote brigades will have your back. Your entire post is a prime example of the kind of content free, pure ideological response that makes "intellectually robust" discussion impossible here.
Did you make a counter argument? No, you just demanded a "cite". Did you defend your assertions as I did? No, you just made broad, obviously false assertions. Did you respond to the point? No, you attacked me personally with derogatory characterizations. Did you defend your ultimate point? No, you just made an assertion that fallacious on the face of it, as would be obvious to anyone who had been paying attention to this issue for more than a few months (apple's been publishing reports of supplier audits for years, and has been doing the audits for decades.)
You are why Hacker News is in decline and why anyone who is capable of argument-- such as myself-- is hesitant to post here, because there really is no point in attempting to engage in debate given the mindless hordes who make purely ideological posts like yours.
In fact, I'm certain that it is-- ironically-- Apple's decades of integrity that is the very reason you hate them so. They have done right, and they won, even after you all thought there was no way they could ever be something more than a marginal player--- so rather than bashing them for being marginal, you're now bashing them for their success.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- twelvechairs 15y ago> Do you have a cite for your claim ... Of course you don't... Isn't it a little presumptuous to deride someone else for not providing cited sources when you haven't provided any yourself?
- ktizo 15y agoYou are why Hacker News is in decline and why anyone who is capable of argument-- such as myself-- is hesitant to post here I'd hate to see what happens when you aren't being hesitant.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- AlisdairO 15y agoYou're talking to someone who was convinced Apple was the sole inventor of multi-touch, abused everyone who claimed otherwise, and then disappeared when definitive counter-proof was provided, without apologising. He's an arrogant fanboy (not a term I use lightly), and he's not worth arguing with.
- nirvana 15y agoYour comment is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. You made six claims, all of which are false, and none of which you provide any evidence of. To best of my recollection, this "counter-proof" was the movie 2001: A Space Odessey. Your comment is pure insult, and much worse, you tell flat out lies about me. I'm sorry that you wish to believe the fiction that Apple didn't invent multi-touch, or that a movie counts as prior art. But you impeach yourself, when you, and others, run around this site telling such lies about people. Its nothing more than personal attack, and you are in fact engaging in the very abuse you accuse me of. By the way, my "abuse" was describing the details of the technology in question. I am always able to defend my positions with logic, facts and argumentation. The problem is, so rarely do I get counter arguments, that such defenses are not often necessary. (notice all of the responses to my posts here are characterizing me, rather than addressing my arguments, for example.) Instead, you guys get into such a blinding rage at the fact that I might dare point out these facts that you have no other ability to respond than to attack me personally. No response from me, should be necessary, but Hacker News is overrun with this kind of partisanship to the point where you feel comfortable saying something that, quite frankly, should get you hellbanned. > "You're talking to someone who was convinced Apple was the sole inventor of multi-touch, abused everyone who claimed otherwise, and then disappeared when definitive counter-proof was provided, without apologising. He's an arrogant fanboy (not a term I use lightly), and he's not worth arguing with." Ah, I see from looking at your comment history, you're attacking me for political and ideological reasons. You're attempting to intimidate me into silence by engaging in ad hominem. Exactly as I indicated was going on on HN. Thank you for providing such a nice example.