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

401–410 of 414 posts

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#401

Post by dang »

ei8htyfi5e wrote: post #198
999900000999 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

[flagged]

You've been breaking the HN guidelines repeatedly and egregiously. We ban accounts that do this, so we need you to stop that now. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here.

If you want more explanation, there's tons at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme.... You can particularly look at the comments listed at https://news.ycombinator.com/chinamod. There are numerous in-depth explanations there; I'm pretty sure I've repeatedly and thoroughly answered every common question that comes up about this.

Bottom line: the simple explanation is that people have different views they do because they have very different backgrounds, and attacking others with this sort of internet poison because of that is not acceptable on this site. In fact, it leads to ugly mob behaviors that we don't want here. It's not the sort of community we want to be.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#402

Post by dang »

network2592 wrote: post #192
trasz wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an article on the same thing happening in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_rape_in_the_United_Stat... .

Quoted post unavailable.

You've been breaking the HN guidelines egregiously with this sort of post. We ban accounts that do that. Please see these other explanations I just posted, and please don't do any more of this, regardless of how wrong others are or you feel they are.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29916918

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29916858

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#403

Post by dang »

trasz wrote: post #379
network2592 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parent comment may not care. But just wanted to thank you for the link. Had just seen one documentary piece on VICE. I was not aware of these other pieces.

Quoted post unavailable.

Please stop perpetuating flamewars on Hacker News. We've had to ask you this many times before. Eventually we ban such accounts.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#404

Post by deltaonefour »

ILMostro7 wrote: post #397
deltaonefour wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

It's not the definition but it's interrelated. When survival directly contradicts morality. Survival takes priority and morality is overridden.

Hence people act immorally in the name of survival.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#405

Post by trasz »

dang wrote: post #403
trasz wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Please stop perpetuating flamewars on Hacker News. We've had to ask you this many times before. Eventually we ban such accounts. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Should I just ignore FUD then, or is there some way to respond to FUD in a way that doesn’t tend to provoke flame wars?

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#406

Post by dang »

trasz wrote: post #405
dang wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please stop perpetuating flamewars on Hacker News. We've had to ask you this many times before. Eventually we ban such accounts. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Should I just ignore FUD then, or is there some way to respond to FUD in a way that doesn’t tend to provoke flame wars?

Good question. The two things that seem to work are:

(1) Provide correct information in a way that is more substantive and more respectful than the comment you're replying to;

and/or

(2) Chalk it up to the internet being wrong about everything and walk away (silently—not with a swipe).

As a side point, you'll usually end up at #2 anyhow, because #1 usually provokes more of the same, so after a certain number of iterations you'll find yourself in a tit-for-tat entanglement, which is greatly to be avoided.

The question is what is the optimal number of iterations. Probably it's 1. Maybe 2. Not 3. 4 is right out.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#407

Post by ILMostro7 »

trasz wrote: post #392
ILMostro7 wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

OK, so as an example, based on your logic here, Muslim detention camps ("re-education centers") with forced abortions and sterilizations are either lies and propaganda OR they rise to the same level of cruelty as incarcerations and systemic racism in US? Having lived through systematic executions and genocide personally, believe me when I say there is a huge difference. I'm not entirely sure if you are making a purely misguided intellectual argument here or, truly, have an ulterior motive in making these assertions. In any case, and for what it's worth to you or anyone else bothering to read these comments and reactions, your comparisons are outside the realm of reality.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#408

Post by ILMostro7 »

dirtyid wrote: post #355
network2592 wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern slavery is a fact [0]. Wikipedia specifically mentions Xinjiang. Wu Mao also has an entry on wikipedia [1]. You are calling people idiots. Please be respectful. This is not in the spirit and guidelines of hacker news. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_21st_century [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29893724

Not idiots, "useful idiots" who can be and are frequently intelligent. It's not meant to be disrespectful, but as a descriptor like WuMao. Who BTW only operates domestically, within PRC and not abroad. And even then WuMaos don't write analysis, they distract with platitudes. >In political jargon, a useful idiot is a derogatory term for a person perceived as propagandizing for a cause without fully comprehending the c…

This is unbelievable. When the dictatorship controls the only "truth" about its country--shutting down dissent internally; preventing access to outsiders...--calling any negative information as propaganda; effectively whitewashing history in the making, etc. It is understandable that there are gaps in knowledge by design, as it helps to control the narrative.

I'm still puzzled how/why some of these comments on here are down-voted; e.g. the comment pointing to wikipedia articles and asking for better discourse.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#409

Post by ILMostro7 »

dirtyid wrote: post #344
simion314 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>slave labour in concentration camps Not an english speaker, so is Is "slave" correctly used here or is more like a "metaphor"?, In my mind a slave is someone you own, you can sell or kill. Someone you keep in prison is called different and people kept in prison for political reasons have also different label, religions/race imprisonment might also have a different label.

>correctly used here It's atrocity propaganda exaggerate by useful idiots, even if out of genuine ignorance. The perpetuator of the original allegation, Zenz, used the label of "coerced labor", which goes through the euphemism treadmill to become forced labor by state department and now slave labor by the even less informed, because that's how propaganda snowballs. Labour transfer programs in XJ, like elsewhere in PR…

The tier of exploitation is forced relocation, analogous to PoW camps. PRC makes use of capitalism to develop and grow while relying on force (through coercion, intimidation, violence, discrimination...) for "efficiencies"--for the greater good.

We've seen this kind of thing many times before. Rule with an iron fist; if caught, deflect, lie, blame it on low-level leadership, corruption, or just statistics.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#410

Post by ILMostro7 »

deltaonefour wrote: post #404
ILMostro7 wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's not the definition but it's interrelated. When survival directly contradicts morality. Survival takes priority and morality is overridden. Hence people act immorally in the name of survival.

Granted. Nevertheless, "survival" might be subjective as well then. Anyway, I'll either have to come back to this at another point or leave it alone :D lest I go too far down the rabbit hole. Thanks
Post reply on HN