231–240 of 449 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's been known for years that Apple is actively against freedom of speech when it comes to its marketplace. Why would you expect it to make an exception for China ?
Freedom of speech only applies to the government. Apple can keep whatever they want out of their store.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You cannot do business in China without doing what they tell you. Of course, I get that. But it's always companies like Apple that make so much noise about social justice who don't stick to their guns when China's involved.
I don't get your complaint at all. What would you rather have them do? What would "sticking to their guns" involve? Or would you rather have them not "make so much noise" about social justice?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I expect Apple to respect universal human rights regardless of the context. Freedom of speech is foundational. And this isn't a China-vs-the-West thing. The idea that people deserve and need to be able to communicate freely predates the current governments of both China and the U.S.
How exactly would they help respect it? Their choices are, as far as I can tell, to either remove certain apps from app store, or to face the app store blocked entirely. I wonder what servers their customers best. It's hard and unpleasant to conduct business in a place where laws are at odds with what you believe is right. But when it's lucrative enough, you may choose to shut up and comply.
I'm not old enough to know this first hand but I believe the anti-apartheid movement against South Africa was started by students and spread to the corporate world before world governments stepped up to ban doing business with South Africa.
This seems to be a specific example of corporate advocacy leading governmental policy.
If the Chinese government's rule over the Chinese people is so egregious to the world, I think Apple would be on solid ground if they refused to do business in China and also refused to do business with Chinese companies outside China.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're a coward. No, he's a Chief Executive. If the Chief Executive can make more money by saying Apple is going to bat for gay people (in America, so bold! so brave! /s) or for your privacy, then the Chief is going to say it. You're at fault for taking them on their word. What you needed was a contract, not an open letter.
I know how these things work note the almost.
>We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
[emphasis mine]
I think you read what you wanted to read, not what was written. What exactly did you almost believe? There is no "we'll fight to death against all laws and leave markets on failure". There is respect to the agency and "please, no" to non-lawful demands. Maximizing this the other way to "I didn't believe anyway" is just a denial. They have mutually benefical intents, but they ain't no force against a man with a law in one hand and loaded gun in the other. They live in reality.
If we only stopped turn claims upside down, the world already would be much better place despite local goverment vectors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fear of the Government that is even in your pocket?! As someone who grew up in the East Block, reading such naive comments as yours leaves me divided. It's good on one hand that you've never came even close to an oppressive government so not even your imagination allows you to grok. On the other hand facing the development in the world, it's quite concerning.
> As someone who grew up in the East Block so you grew up in the old communist eastern bloc, and you want to blindly compare what you suffered back then to what is happening in China now? I didn't grew up in communism, I grew up after the 1978 reform in China. My entire extended family work for the private sector with my closest family members running their own successful private businesses. Did you guys have that in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're confusing morality and legality, and it seems you're in good company around here. But it's not the role of corporate to white knighting a country cultural revolution. Still, interestig to see a nice quip at a completely wrong scale/context captivate such a large audience.
> But it's not the role of corporate to white knighting a country cultural revolution. You are aware that that is just your arbitrary declaration of what you think their role should be, right? I hereby declare that their role is to do just that. What now?
If you build in the ability to censor, you can't disclaim responsibility when a state makes you do it. We'll see the same sort of thing in Russia, the UK, and so on. Apple can still act, if they wish, by not locking down their users. I know that'd be a big step for them.
That doesn't mean app stores are inherently evil; they still do a lot of good by making sure people can easily find and pay for high-quality apps.
As you say, a reasonable alternative would be to allow side loading of apps, so that people can find and load apps distributed via various peer-to-peer ways, without Apple being responsible.
Seems that Apple is just following, with much delay, the law of People's Republic of China. I don't understand why some people think companies should be above the law.
> I don't understand why some people think companies should be above the law. I think certain aspects of justice are above legal frameworks. For instance, slavery is wrong no matter what the law says. Companies like Apple, by lobbying the government for various non-business things (gay rights, climate change, etc.), recognize this. I think wholesale restriction and manipulation of political speech is just wrong even…
I hope you realize that you are only saying this because you happen to be born at this particular point in human civilization.
For a very long time, people thought slavery is right, including the people who wrote your constitution (assuming your are from US). It is easy to say that slavery is wrong now, but not in 18th century in the US. Think of China as the US, a few centuries ago, when human rights are still a concept being explored.