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

Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 252 posts

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#141

Post by Ghjklov »

Aqua wrote: post #3

Isn't it surprising that Microsoft, Apple, Google, Netflix, Blizzard and others don't express their deep regret and support the people of Hong Kong? If they really stood by their values they would act in the same way as they did by supporting the BLM movement. It's just another proof that they only did that to get press coverage for being "benevolent" and not because they genuinely supported the people. Disgraceful.

Not surprising. There won't be any Chinese people coming to riot and destroy their businesses if they don't.

Just like how many small businesses are forced to put up signs supporting BLM and signs saying they are minority owned and asking to not be looted. Because there is an implicit threat of being destroyed if you do not support BLM.

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#142

Post by system16 »

Aqua wrote: post #3

Isn't it surprising that Microsoft, Apple, Google, Netflix, Blizzard and others don't express their deep regret and support the people of Hong Kong? If they really stood by their values they would act in the same way as they did by supporting the BLM movement. It's just another proof that they only did that to get press coverage for being "benevolent" and not because they genuinely supported the people. Disgraceful.

About the only fairly large tech company CEO that has spoken out against China is Stripe's Patrick Collison:

https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1277783532182671361?lang...

Mind you, Stripe has no real vested interest in China so that's probably why, but at least it's something.

Edit: Also, with the pace at which China is eroding Hong Kong's freedoms, the Great Firewall expanding to Hong Kong can't be that far off. Once Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. are also banned in Hong Kong, maybe then they'll have an opinion.

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#143

Post by clairity »

arkades wrote: post #77
Adverblessly wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that this is the behaviour displayed by (almost?) all large corporations and thus that expecting that they will behave differently is irrational, in the sense that that expectation will always turn out to be false. That said, I don't see why that means we should expect that behaviour in the sense that we should consider this the expected, correct, behvaiour from corporations. Perhaps if everyone believed that…

> If everyone was like OP in condeming these corporations maybe their expectations would eventually become real. No, they wouldn't, because the selection pressure on the organization is for the minimum amount of signaling required to optimize profits, not actual morality - not least of which because optimizing for profits optimizes for continued existence of the organization, and maximizing morality does not. Holding…

while you make some good points, you seem to be leaning too far into them.

we can have non-profit-seeking expectations (like morality) of corporations because it's made up of people, not robots, and the drivers of profit are (often) indirect and nonlinear. and it doesn't matter that corporations don't internalize moral behavior the same way an individual does. it gets internalized throughout the people in the corporations (stochastically, not uniformly). that's a fine outcome for the expectations we have.

social censure would be modeled as losing regard (brand value) for the corporation, and corps spend craploads of money keeping up their image because it affects profits. censure should lead to some loss of aggregate business, which does ultimately put profit pressure on the corporation.

maybe that's less effective compared to direct regulation, but social censure is immensely more accessible than regulation for most people and even most other businesses. maybe censure is not as good as regulation, but that's a claim that at least requires some rhetorical support. it's certainly better than nothing or a slim chance of proper regulation.

that said, we should do both, and more, to keep corporations--power structures--in line with what we as the people want (not the other way around). the balance is an unstable equilibrium and we need constant vigilance and pressure to maintain it favorably.

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#144

Post by koonsolo »

Aqua wrote: post #3

Isn't it surprising that Microsoft, Apple, Google, Netflix, Blizzard and others don't express their deep regret and support the people of Hong Kong? If they really stood by their values they would act in the same way as they did by supporting the BLM movement. It's just another proof that they only did that to get press coverage for being "benevolent" and not because they genuinely supported the people. Disgraceful.

I would think that the more wealthy you are, the more ethics you can afford. Who cares about not gaining some billions when you already have multiple billions in the bank?

But somehow, this doesn't seem to be the case.

Is it just greed, or am I missing something?

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#145

Post by refurb »

josteink wrote: post #131
refurb wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying they support BLM costs them almost nothing and is pretty low risk (now that’s moved mainstream). I know my company quietly waited until it was clear nobody would bat an eye if they did a press release supporting BLM. Hong Kong? That might actually require a bit of financial risk and negative publicity (at least in China). Now that real money is involved? “Our company believes the best way to support change in…

> I know my company quietly waited until it was clear nobody would bat an eye if they did a press release supporting BLM. It may have a vocal (majority?) support, but it’s still a very divisive issue. It’s probably better to not raise any flag, unless you really mean it and genuinely want to support it.

The BLM movement has gotten to the point that if companies don’t make some statement of support they are risking negative PR.

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#146

Post by aiilns »

arkades wrote: post #17
Aqua wrote: post #3

Isn't it surprising that Microsoft, Apple, Google, Netflix, Blizzard and others don't express their deep regret and support the people of Hong Kong? If they really stood by their values they would act in the same way as they did by supporting the BLM movement. It's just another proof that they only did that to get press coverage for being "benevolent" and not because they genuinely supported the people. Disgraceful.

Did you at some point think that the corporate leadership of a massive for-profit organization was going to make a public statement that was anything other than the bare minimum lip service they were required to pay in order to weather the PR storm of the day, so that they could continue doing business? The answer to that question is almost always "no," and certainly until proven otherwise. Complaining that these cor…

>corporations are not hypocrites, either, because corporations don't hold beliefs. They make PR statements.Their belief is "I will say what I need to in order to be left in peace to maximize profits."

This is the definition of a hypocrite. I see in your comments an attempt for seemingly logically sound conclusions that stem from unsubstantiated aphorisms. "Corporations don't hold beliefs", "Morality is for people" not corporations.

Just because a corporation is made up from a group of people doesn't magically make it unable to hold any values. I would argue that it does hold values, values that are shaped by the people working there and the society in which it operates: Profit-seeking institutions don't have morality because they are made up of profit-seeking people in a profit-seeking society.

I would expect your comment to be a prelude to why the capitalist model isn't working, why values are being eroded and eclipsed by the the need for profit, yet you stop short.

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#147

Post by [deleted] »

hkai wrote: post #129
justicezyx wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traditional Chinese are quite consistent with simplified one. I think you ought to say English and Spanish are replaced by British English and European Spanish?

I will admit it was not the best comparison. But having these books does feel quite scary, that a foreign language (even though you understand it well) is imposed on you by a hostile government.

[deleted]

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#148

Post by tobtoh »

arkades wrote: post #77
Adverblessly wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that this is the behaviour displayed by (almost?) all large corporations and thus that expecting that they will behave differently is irrational, in the sense that that expectation will always turn out to be false. That said, I don't see why that means we should expect that behaviour in the sense that we should consider this the expected, correct, behvaiour from corporations. Perhaps if everyone believed that…

> If everyone was like OP in condeming these corporations maybe their expectations would eventually become real. No, they wouldn't, because the selection pressure on the organization is for the minimum amount of signaling required to optimize profits, not actual morality - not least of which because optimizing for profits optimizes for continued existence of the organization, and maximizing morality does not. Holding…

> If everyone was like OP in condeming these corporations maybe their expectations would eventually become real.

>> No, they wouldn't, because the selection pressure on the organization is for the minimum amount of signaling required to optimize profits, not actual morality - not least of which because optimizing for profits optimizes for continued existence of the organization, and maximizing morality does not.

But if everyone condemned corporations (assuming that translates into consumers not purchasing their products), then that becomes the selection criteria impacting their profit.

So whilst your point that the corporations don't hold 'real' moral positions is fine, the OP would appear to be also correct in their assertion that condemnation will push a corporation to take a moral position (or pseudo-moral position if you want) and their expectations would eventually become real.

Re: Hong Kong: books by pro-democracy activists disappear from library shelves

#150

Post by miles »

koonsolo wrote: post #144
Aqua wrote: post #3

Isn't it surprising that Microsoft, Apple, Google, Netflix, Blizzard and others don't express their deep regret and support the people of Hong Kong? If they really stood by their values they would act in the same way as they did by supporting the BLM movement. It's just another proof that they only did that to get press coverage for being "benevolent" and not because they genuinely supported the people. Disgraceful.

I would think that the more wealthy you are, the more ethics you can afford. Who cares about not gaining some billions when you already have multiple billions in the bank? But somehow, this doesn't seem to be the case. Is it just greed, or am I missing something?

And yet, virtually of those who have spoken truth to power have not been wealthy. As Einstein put it[1]:

"I am absolutely convinced that no wealth in the world can help humanity forward, even in the hands of the most devoted worker in this cause. The example of great and pure characters is the only thing that can produce fine ideas and noble deeds. Money only appeals to selfishness and always tempts its owners irresistibly to abuse it. Can anyone imagine Moses, Jesus, or Gandhi armed with the money-bags of Carnegie?"

[1] https://books.google.com/books?id=Y_9kDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PT37&ots=...

Post reply on HN