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

US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

dropbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 331 posts

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#251

Post by ant6n »

disillusioned wrote: post #123
fxtentacle wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think not because all the concentrations were pretty low. The problem that Ashley faced was that she was exposed 24/7. But to me it looks like almost all of the gas concentrations would have been considered an A-OK working environment for up to 8 hours of exposure. And while it's not wrong that fluorine is a lethal gas, it is heavily used in many industries and in medicine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorine#In…

Isn't a bigger factor here, in addition to their careless attitude, the fact that they've started manufacturing semiconductors on land specifically only zoned for light industrial use, when, at least per her article, fabricating semiconductors is work that is required to be zoned heavy industrial? The issue being, of course, the proximity of residential to a "light industrial" vs. "heavy industrial" plot sure changes…

It’s like something out of some old Batman film: „we‘ll put the poison factory right in the middle of Gotham city!“

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#252

Post by settsu »

Not that it should matter, but it seems impossible to conclude anything from the publicly available information and neither party seems interested in building a coherent narrative that strengthens their position.

And, like it or not, if an argument relies on confusion (especially if intended to bring the other party's credibility into question with the general public) then that argument can easily appear specious.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#253

Post by soulofmischief »

talldayo wrote: post #205
soulofmischief wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In early 2015, Apple started stealth semiconductor fabrication activities in a facility located at 3250 Scott Boulevard in Santa Clara California, less than two hundred feet from thousands of homes. The factory intentionally vented its exhaust of solvent vapors and toxic gases straight from the roof and into the ambient outdoor air, with little or no abatement. The factory was only one story while the apartments we…

> There is no defending Apple here. These decisions are made by multiple people who should all be in prison. Bingo. There's this curious willingness from the HN community to jump in and defend the whole of a corporation when a single part makes a mistake. We've seen them come out in droves when rational people criticize the App Store, the Butterfly keyboard, inhumane working environments or unsafe centralized service…

As an owner of Apple hardware, it is my basic duty to hold them accountable. Yet many of the people who rush to defend Apple somehow think it's hypocritical to be a customer of them while simultaneously criticizing them. And there is so, so much to criticize.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#254

Post by dang »

therein wrote: post #248
dang wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your comment is motivated by substantive personal experience, that's great, but then the thing to do is to share some of the information that your view is based on. You know it, but the rest of us don't. A snarky swipe with no information is just as bad a comment whether it's posted by someone with relevant experience or not. If you don't share relevant information, it may as well not exist. If you do share it, yo…

> It looks like you can speak openly enough about it to say more than just "Hello Apple Global Security", which is the run-of-the-mill internet stuff we're trying to avoid on this site. If that's what you mean by letting out a quip, please don't. > If your comment is motivated by substantive personal experience, that's great, but then the thing to do is to share some of the information that your view is based on. You…

Yes, that's the sort of comment which would have been fine in the first place.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#255

Post by HumblyTossed »

maxehmookau wrote: post #105
canogat wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recognized her name when this story dropped. She’s been on an Apple vendetta for some time.

At what point does legitimate whistleblowing become a vendetta?

When the Apple fan boys say so.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#256

Post by joe_the_user »

murderfs wrote: post #55

The author of this has been on a crusade against Apple for years, stemming from an incident that was probably hypochondria. They've outright lied about multiple incidents (see https://twitter.com/shantinix/status/1433297575914971136 ), and I would very strongly doubt any new claims made. For example, a spot check of one of the claims has them currently saying "Still, Gjovik’s limited testing returned results showing…

"The Author"? Was this once a different link? The current link seems to be a report by the EPA.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#258

Post by gtmitchell »

As a chemist who has actually done micro fabrication work, this reads to me like a classic case of a non-chemistry company trying to do chemistry R&D and finding out it’s a lot more complicated to follow all the rules than they thought it would be.

Robust chemical safety systems (both equipment, procedures, and employees) are expensive to implement and maintain, and they don’t scale downward easily. Companies doing small-scale production or R&D tend to have the worst practices.

That said, the findings in this EPA report don’t seem terrible, just indicative of a sloppy small-scale operation. Finding labeling issues is the lowest of low hanging fruit for any sort of chemical inspector, and Apple not being able to manage even that is just sad.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#259

Post by Aloisius »

langsoul-com wrote: post #10

From the thread TLDR; EPA discovered that Apple was: - illegally treating hazardous waste - illegally transporting hazardous waste to disposal facilities - illegally dumping hazardous waste into the ambient air outside the facility (into the apartment windows) - leaving stockpiles of extremely dangerous chemicals unattended on weekends

> - illegally dumping hazardous waste into the ambient air outside the facility (into the apartment windows)

The EPA report appears to imply the opposite. Apple's potential violation was not for their air exhaust system, but rather for using an activated carbon filter because they had not declared it in their permit application.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#260

Post by p4ul »

AdamN wrote: post #100
user_7832 wrote: post #51

> (...) Apple engineer “accidently” turning on lethal fluorine gas. Similarly, another incident, the TEOS leak, was root caused to an Apple engineer accidently installing the gas for a tool “backwards.” Further, less than two weeks following the April 30 2021 phosphine leak, Apple’s manifests included sixty pounds of “vacuum filters contaminated with glass dust,” implying there may have also been a phosphine explosio…

Inside industrial settings I would presume stuff like this happens all the time. In fact, people even die sometimes. Even when a refinery blew up in Texas a few years back it barely made the news. On a side note, Fluorine is bad stuff but I believe it doesn't have a long lifespan so any impact would be immediate or not at all

This is correct, sadly.

I've done some work with the public data from the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA does a great job of making detailed data on inspections and accidents public. If memory serves me correctly, it turns out there are about two deaths per day from work-related causes in the US...

Post reply on HN