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

Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

nasdaq.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 414 posts

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#391

Post by 2Gkashmiri »

Steltek wrote: post #390
2Gkashmiri wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i agree that china isn't a free market. i am saying neither is india nor usa. https://www.ndtv.com/business/visa-complains-to-us-governmen... visa is complaining to usa demanding that india not give preferential treatment to their own card network because india knows usa can unilaterally kill a country's card infrastructure by simply telling visa/mastercard to stop their services. that is abuse of power and not "free…

I suppose all I could offer in defense is that the Iran sanctions were over nuclear technology, ISIS, etc; not speech or "loss of face". Ugh, still, the Middle East makes the US lose its damn mind. I hadn't really followed anti-BDS laws (not a thing in my state). Looks like they get slapped down pretty easily by the courts for violating free speech.

need i remind you iran had a coup organized by cia and british inteligence because the ruler decided to nationalize oil and not give in to shell? what happened in 79? there was no nuclear threat back then. it was just oil and control.

funny you mention nuclear tech. the iran deal was supposed to prevent that and it was usa who shot that down, not iran and you blame them for trying?

you may not know this but the reason for sanctions on iran is to specifically install a government that is kind to israel because israel lobbies for that in us congress and they have installed the whole "oppose israel=support holocaust=hitler bad". they could not do arab spring there so more sanctions.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#392

Post by trasz »

ILMostro7 wrote: post #387
trasz wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is a thing, same as corporate censorship in the West. It’s just that Chinese don’t try to pretend it’s not the case.

Right, otherwise, it's just propaganda and people lying about their own horrific experiences. Got it.

They aren’t lying. It’s hair that there is similar amount of people with similar experiences in, say, American prisons. Propaganda is how you somehow pretend those are different.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#393

Post by trasz »

leadingthenet wrote: post #389
trasz wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is a thing, same as corporate censorship in the West. It’s just that Chinese don’t try to pretend it’s not the case.

Corporate censorship and state censorship are completely different beasts, and this false equivalence you're trying to paint is obvious FUD.

Indeed - one of them can be, at least in theory, controlled by society. That’s what’s happening in China. The other is where corporations essentially own the state, as is the case in US.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#394

Post by deltaonefour »

3minus1 wrote: post #369
deltaonefour wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>corporations are not people and do not have morals or values The irony of this is that all corporations and all decisions and actions taken by corporations are made by people. If anything corporations are the most clear and unmistakable reflection of what it truly means to be human without the masks we wear in daily life. Other than that, yeah I get what you're saying.

This isn't true when the people making the decisions are atypical humans in terms of morality. Consider two identical corporations where one has a normal morally conscious person and the other has a sociopath. If the second corp has an edge in business you could see how it could lead to non-average decision makers.

The CEO is elected by a board and the board is chosen by shareholders. If the board and CEO don't perform they can be fired.

The threat of termination is what causes someone "typical" to act "atypically." Survival instincts kick in, and anything goes.

Or you could be right. The CEO in such a position refuses to act immorally and is than fired by the shareholders for not hitting performance metrics. They then hire another and another... until they find a CEO willing to throw away his morality to hit those performance numbers.

Do the shareholders care? No.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#395

Post by AlwaysRock »

revnode wrote: post #276
AlwaysRock wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is vacationing to China? Some Americans who might have picked China in the past are no longer vacationing to China. Massive amounts of people of Chinese descent still vacation to China. The difference between them and Soviet Russia is people. There are a billion and a half Chinese people. There was less than 300 million people in Soviet Russia. You don't need tourism or immigration when you have a billion+ peo…

> There are a billion and a half Chinese people. How long is that going to last? Populations fluctuate. They shot themselves in the foot with their one-child policy. India is also quite populous, but doesn't seem to exert the same kind of influence.

Indias middle class makes up a much smaller percent of their population when compared to China. They will likely have similar influence if they continue to expand their middle class, as China spent the last 20 years doing.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#396

Post by causality0 »

jevoten wrote: post #11
causality0 wrote: post #4

We were happy to embrace the philosophy of sociopathic capitalist companies when it meant getting our cheap electronics built in factories with suicide nets. Now that it means giant companies care more about China's opinion than ours we want to posture about loyalty and moral responsibility.

I don't recall anyone but the investor class being happy to embrace offshoring. But it took the economist and investor class the longest to realize the drawbacks that others knew instinctively. And now you use "we" to describe their opinion and lobbying?

Every person who walks into a Walmart or orders from Amazon is happy to embrace off-shoring. Every single one of those products has a label declaring where it was made. We made that decision over and over.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#397

Post by ILMostro7 »

deltaonefour wrote: post #331
tharne wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Human behavior is remarkably different depending on whether or not I'm the sole person on stage responsible for an action or whether I'm a single anonymous vote. This is exactly it. In a large organization, everyone can mentally offload any responsibility to someone else. The rank and file can say "It's not my decision, the execs told me to do this". The executives can say, "It's the board pushing me to do xyz and…

>are moral but are contributing to an organization that is acting immorally in the aggregate. I would argue that the individuals are immoral and the corporations foster conditions that reveal this fundamental immorality that is usually hidden. We only act moral if there's a consequence detrimental to ourselves.

That's not the definition of morality. That's self-interest or self-preservation. Adhering to a set of guidelines or rules with empathy, regardless if it doesn't immediately register as detrimental to ourselves is more like it.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#398

Post by loceng »

melonbar wrote: post #124
loceng wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can believe the Earth is flat if I avoid the evidence and don't care about congruence - especially if financially motivated.

I could not agree with you more, it amazes me the mental gymnastics some will go through in the quest to convince themselves otherwise of something wholly obvious. Sure, you could take the CCP’s word for it (because their behavior is not at all suspicious and they have a great track record when it comes to human rights). And sure, to some that might hold a lot of weight. However, even if rumored, don’t you want to be…

The even bigger tell is when the UN wanted to go into China to independently investigate, the CCP denied access. They don't want to be a team player in the global society/economy.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#399

Post by trasz »

network2592 wrote: post #140
ei8htyfi5e wrote: post #129

[flagged]

Quoted post unavailable.

“Astroturfing” happens every time someone posts propaganda pretending it’s facts.

As for grammar: you do realize there’s quite a few people living outside the US, besides China? :-D

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#400

Post by dang »

jude- wrote: post #285

[flagged]

I'm sorry, but you're breaking the site guidelines badly by posting like this. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and note this one:

"Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data."

These perceptions are notoriously unreliable because they're driven not by evidence (someone else having a different view from you does not count as evidence), but rather by the passions of the perceiver. Basically, people who feel strongly on a topic can't imagine that someone who feels the opposite could possibly be in good faith, so they make up stories about manipulation, astroturf, shillage, spies, foreign agents, bots, and/or trolls, to explain what feels inexplicable. It's an extremely common dynamic on the internet, and it's also extremely poisonous, so we don't want it here.

For tons of past explanation, see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...

That's not to say there's no such thing as real abuse—just that there needs to be something objective to go on before making any such claims, and people on the internet having different opinions than you does not come close to clearing that bar. On the contrary. I've written many detailed explanations about this, some of which are listed at https://news.ycombinator.com/chinamod, if anyone wants to read more.

Post reply on HN