Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 209 posts

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#171

Post by TrickyRick »

pimmen wrote: post #164
olalonde wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true. I lived in China for a few years and was surprised to find out that most people seemed relatively (if not very) happy with the CCP. Ignorance plays a role but it's mainly that they value economic growth (and therefore, political stability) over anything else. Free speech would be nice but when you go from near starvation to owning a house and a car, you learn what economic growth does and start to value…

The thing is though that the economic growth came after, and as a result of, the market deregulations and special economic zones instituted by the Deng administration. The founding principles of the CCP has been proven not to work in China, they led to millions of people starving to death and a huge brain drain to the US, Europe, Hong Kong and Taiwan the effects of which are still felt today. So, I wonder if it's not…

They could also tell that there are a number of countries with fresh democracies that have fared a lot worse (See the entirety of eastern Europe for instance).

The view that "Meh, it could be worse" is the one that's been most prevalent among those who I've talked to about the issue. As mentioned higher up in the thread, it's easy to look the other way when it comes to a couple of human rights crimes when your family has gone from starvation to owning cars and apartments in skyscrapers in less than a generation.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#172

Post by TrickyRick »

Jyaif wrote: post #152
MBCook wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. That's why neither iMessage nor FaceTime use encryption in china. Because they don't care. Oh wait, Apple still uses into end encryption in China for both of those so that the Government Camp spy on people. Getting rid of VPN apps is part of staying in China. So the question you have to ask is which is better for Apple to do: stay trying out without VPNs but keeping their consumer products encrypted whe…

Facetime is blocked in china, and I'm willing to bet that the non-sms part of iMessage is blocked as well... But there's nothing wrong with staying in China to increase profits, it's their biggest market after all.

> Facetime is blocked in china, and I'm willing to bet that the non-sms part of iMessage is blocked as well..

Both these facts are false according to the article we're discussing.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#173

Post by 9935c101ab17a66 »

mtgx wrote: post #122
bmc7505 wrote: post #7

As much as I dislike Apple, they made the right choice here. While it may be easy to praise Apple's stance against FBI backdooring the iPhone's secure boot and condemn their compliance with removing VPN apps from the Chinese app store, the latter policy is completely unlike the former for several good reasons. With the Chinese market, you need to choose your battles. Removing VPN apps from the Appstore does not compr…

> Removing VPN apps from the Appstore does not compromise the privacy of any Apple users That's such BS. VPN apps are banned because they give users privacy. So it's logical that by removing them it hurts people's privacy in China. > and does not prevent existing users of these apps from continuing to use them on their devices. And that's a copout and you know it. As soon as people reset their phones or buy new ones…

> That's such BS. VPN apps are banned because they give users privacy. So it's logical that by removing them it hurts people's privacy in China.

I find it funny that this statement is literally an example of a logical fallacy.

> And that's a copout and you know it. As soon as people reset their phones or buy new ones they won't be able to "continue using them". Taking that as a "win" is absurd.

The person your replying also did not use the term "win", and yet you quote it and tack it on at the end to add emphasis. It's very strange.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#174

Post by icebraining »

Barrin92 wrote: post #15
sriku wrote: post #12

Apple stood for privacy in the US where privacy is part of law. It didn't stand by privacy in China where privacy in some forms is prohibited as part of law. Asserting the US law in China would discount China's sovereignty, implicitly declaring "your principles are inferior to ours". A global company needs to be sensitive to these political/cultural differences and accommodate them. Even in the US where "privacy" is…

exactly. Outsourcing foreign politics or issues of morality to a business is both harmful (because that's arguably not what a company's task is or ought to be) and it circumvents Chinese law. If issues of privacy in China are very important to you electing officials who's foreign policy reflects that is a better idea.

that's arguably not what a company's task is or ought to be

Ok, argue it. Why should a company, as a member of the society it's based in, be above criticism for taking immoral actions just because they happen somewhere else?

And does that apply to any immoral action, or do you draw a line?

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#175

Post by TrickyRick »

int_19h wrote: post #153
prewett wrote: post #93

Is this a news piece or an opinion piece? The article is terrible. Apple has two choices: comply with the laws of China when operating in China or not operate in China. They can refuse to comply on principle, get kicked out of China, and get sued by their shareholders for breach of fiduciary duty. They can use all available means (none) to fight it. Or they can obey the laws of the country they are operating in. I be…

It's not just about Apple. Apple is still headquartered in US. Thus, it's also a moral quandary for US, because American lawmakers can make it a more stark choice for Apple: they can pass a law saying that no American company can aid and abet human rights violations. Then the choice for Apple would be to operate in China and comply with laws of China, or operate in US and comply with laws of US. Is that too extreme?…

> We all remember how IBM helped implement Holocaust

Do you have more details of this? I've never heard about it before.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#176

Post by sremani »

olalonde wrote: post #87
schoen wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with attempts to prevent governments from controlling speech, have spent a fair amount of time working on that, and was disturbed by Apple's role here, I don't think the dichotomy you present works as cleanly as you suggest. State power and culture shape and reinforce each other in an extremely complex way.

That's true. I lived in China for a few years and was surprised to find out that most people seemed relatively (if not very) happy with the CCP. Ignorance plays a role but it's mainly that they value economic growth (and therefore, political stability) over anything else. Free speech would be nice but when you go from near starvation to owning a house and a car, you learn what economic growth does and start to value…

People in general will tolerate restrictive systems as long as they are economically compensated or economic system is humming. The most authoritarian regimes, use fear but the most used tactic is to "payoff" the "village elders". If a dictator yielded the kind of break-neck growth that China experienced in any Western country, there is a good chance people will put up with it. The problem is when the growth dies, and the gravy train stops. How will CCP handle a low growth system? By becoming more authoritarian, that is what is happening in China with corruption purges.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#177

Post by nabla9 »

Apple's silence reflects the cynicism of consumers that buy Apple products.

Apple is mainly selling a brand and not a product. Apple is archetypal emotional brand. It's intimate with its customers and it is loved.

As most global companies, Apple as a company has no morals. It takes moral stance when it's builds up the brand without hurting the sales. Only way to make Apple to sacrifice something is to threaten the brand and make Apple users feel dirty.

More stories like this. People must stop loving and identifying with brands. All brands.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#178

Post by pimmen »

TrickyRick wrote: post #171
pimmen wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is though that the economic growth came after, and as a result of, the market deregulations and special economic zones instituted by the Deng administration. The founding principles of the CCP has been proven not to work in China, they led to millions of people starving to death and a huge brain drain to the US, Europe, Hong Kong and Taiwan the effects of which are still felt today. So, I wonder if it's not…

They could also tell that there are a number of countries with fresh democracies that have fared a lot worse (See the entirety of eastern Europe for instance). The view that "Meh, it could be worse" is the one that's been most prevalent among those who I've talked to about the issue. As mentioned higher up in the thread, it's easy to look the other way when it comes to a couple of human rights crimes when your family…

Not to steer this completely off topic, but despite a lot of setbacks in Poland, Hungary and Russia the economic situation post USSR in Eastern Europe has been tremendous (Poland was the only country in the EU not to suffer negative growth in the Great Recession), the political rights to the citizens (such as being able to vote for more than one party), the freedom of the press increases (even in Poland, despite the recent setback with government intervention in public service media) is far beyond what China has mustered since the Deng deregulations started in the early 80s.

If you're Polish or even Russian you are far more likely to have a nice car, food on the table, a nice house, the ability to blog about whatever interests you, read what you want and even run for office than if you're a citizen of the PRC. So, again, it sounds like it's mostly ignorance, or expectations that democracies never experience setbacks.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#179

Post by nl »

prewett wrote: post #89
rayiner wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A global company needs to be sensitive to these political/cultural differences and accommodate them. Global companies are instrumental in transmitting western values to the rest of the world. You can't antagonize host countries but at the same time you can't ignore the arc of the moral universe. Domestically, a great example is the economic repercussion for southern states that tried to pass trans bathroom laws. Co…

So by that logic, Chinese companies should push Chinese values on the rest of the world. Are you okay with that? And if not, what makes Western values special? Absent an independent moral authority (i.e. God of some sort), there's no way to say that Western values even should be spread. Absent an independent moral authority, pushing your values on everyone else is exactly what the Chinese government is doing. The tra…

You'd better have concrete direction from the independent moral authority (i.e. God) if you're going to push your values on other people, because otherwise it's just intolerant.

There's a universal declaration of human rights. It's a pretty decent attempt at a starting point for non-divine moral authority.

Re: Apple’s Silence in China Sets a Dangerous Precedent

#180

Post by nl »

prewett wrote: post #93

Is this a news piece or an opinion piece? The article is terrible. Apple has two choices: comply with the laws of China when operating in China or not operate in China. They can refuse to comply on principle, get kicked out of China, and get sued by their shareholders for breach of fiduciary duty. They can use all available means (none) to fight it. Or they can obey the laws of the country they are operating in. I be…

They can refuse to comply on principle, get kicked out of China, and get sued by their shareholders for breach of fiduciary duty.

What is it with tech people throwing potential fiduciary duty suits for management decisions around like they are a thing?

The suits themselves might be not-unknown, but it is very rare for one to succeed, especially if the company is profitable and the management hasn't broken US law.

Legally management has almost complete freedom to make management decisions - the "correct" course for shareholders to dispute that is either to buy more shares and try to get a board seat and fire management, or sell shares.

I'm not sure if Apple made the right decision here or not. But this "breach of fiduciary duty" argument is nonsense and it should be stopped.

Post reply on HN