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

221–230 of 414 posts

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#221

Post by reaperducer »

Loughla wrote: post #146
michaelt wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shareholders haven't resolved that Intel must or must not use slave labour. And a court isn't going to second-guess the management if they judge the cost savings of using slave labour don't outweigh the potential for reputational damage. As such, management are free to act either way.

I would argue that 'shareholders' aren't able to influence these decisions at multi-national mega corporations, because many don't even know they are shareholders . Think about Joe Blow from the US. He has a managed 401k or some such investment. He has no idea the 'low-risk' fund offered through Edward Jones invests in Intel or Google or whoever. He has no idea he plays a part in this.

I would argue that 'shareholders' aren't able to influence these decisions at multi-national mega corporations

There's such a thing as activist investors, and they seem to be gaining influence lately. From what I read in the newspaper, they're behind a lot of the changes that are starting to happen at certain multi-national oil companies.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#222

Post by network2592 »

jchook wrote: post #195
alkonaut wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every country and company on the planet should of course assume the worst - until free and independent media is free to report on it. Are Intel execs given objective reports by independent journalists who are given access to all areas and are free to write an report as they want on it? Until then, Intel execs should assume that any rumor of wrongdoing in the province is true. It's as simple as that. One simply doesn'…

Why doesn’t the US impose sanctions on Saudi Arabia for their genocide of Yemen?

No post body was provided.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#223

Post by radmuzom »

tlear wrote: post #136
network2592 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any critical non interchangeable raw material that goes into Intel chips for which CCP has exclusive global control? Xinjiang has some silica mines [0] which may go into silicon production. Presumably, that is a critical material for Intel. Can it be sourced elsewhere? Is that the leverage the CCP has over Intel? [0] https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3139062/u...

Silica is not an issue. Intel executives getting kidnapped(err arrested for illegal blah blah), local managers disappearing, sudden "corruption" investigations etc. There are 2 choices, clear out everything and everyone associated with Intel out of PRC or comply.

Funny how China doing something are always in the future tense. Whereas the ones who have committed the atrocity of actually illegally detaining an executive by putting pressure on a friendly country is the USA.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#224

Post by alkonaut »

jchook wrote: post #195
alkonaut wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every country and company on the planet should of course assume the worst - until free and independent media is free to report on it. Are Intel execs given objective reports by independent journalists who are given access to all areas and are free to write an report as they want on it? Until then, Intel execs should assume that any rumor of wrongdoing in the province is true. It's as simple as that. One simply doesn'…

Why doesn’t the US impose sanctions on Saudi Arabia for their genocide of Yemen?

[flagged]

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#225

Post by froh »

photochemsyn wrote: post #103

[flagged]

As a european, I'm amazed and deeply irritated that forced labor to this day is part of the US prison system:

https://www.npr.org/transcripts/884989263?t=1641920153339

And I'm also irritated that in the US many convicts (not just inmates) lose their right to vote, a human right that in Europe you'd only lose for direct attack to the democracy (like the Jan 6 mob, or voting fraud, and even then only for a limited period of time).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disfranchisement#Europe

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#226

Post by harpersealtako »

999900000999 wrote: post #197
harpersealtako wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interned prisoners in Xinjiang, China are detained with no due process without having ever committed a crime. They are systematically forced to abandon their religion, their culture, and their identity. They are tortured physically and mentally, with beatings, and electric shocks, and waterboarded. They are forcibly sterilized. They are brainwashed as a condition to even be fed, which they are often not. There is for…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalief_Browder Kid was held without trial for 3 years. I'm not saying who's worse, I'm saying we need to do better before we critic others. https://eji.org/issues/children-in-prison/ We put kids in prison here.

>I'm not saying who's worse, I'm saying we need to do better before we critic others.

But you ARE saying they are morally equivalent. In your own words, "the pot calling the kettle black". And...one of them is so insanely worse than the other that to dance around the issue like that is absurd.

If Hitler rose from the dead tomorrow and started another Holocaust, would you be against critique or action against it because "we need to do better about our flawed prison policy at home before we criticize others"? "Hitler just killed another million people in the gas chambers, but sometimes innocent people get the death penalty in America too, we can't criticize their concentration camps until we fix our problems at home"?

We're talking about the largest-scale detention of ethnic and religious minorities since World War II. Are you suggesting that we shouldn't try to stop a genocide because the US criminal justice system has some notable flaws and we need to fix them first? Am I understanding you correctly? Even after reading the part about the mass rape and sexual torture of an entire culture of people?

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#227

Post by jchook »

vorpalhex wrote: post #212
jchook wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s economic warfare against a destabilized region that only recently quelled constant terrorism. The US casts a blanket assumption that ALL products from the region are produced by slave labor unless proven otherwise. That’s backwards. And meanwhile US government and corporations have no problem buying products produced by US prison slave labor, or overseas child labor.

We are cracking down on slave labor supply chains. We are merely starting with the worst offender: China.

The US imprisons 5x as many people per capita as China and buys billions of dollars of products made by US prison slave labor.

They could start there.

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#228

Post by vanusa »

jchook wrote: post #156
ei8htyfi5e wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s absolutely not backwards. When you have a million people in a concentration camp in a given region, and China is known for shipping these slaves around their country to work in factories, to make sanctions and targeted policies more difficult to apply, can you maybe see why a rule of thumb has been created black listing an entire region? This is their choice. Cause. Effect.

“A million people in a concentration camp” says US state agencies who tried to prevent the UN from investigating and Adrian Zenz commissioned by the BBC. Let’s ask the UN what they think about China’s response to terrorism in Xinjiang after investigating. > Faced with the grave challenge of terrorism and extremism, China has undertaken a series of counter-terrorism and deradicalization measures in Xinjiang, including…

So not "the UN" as you misrepresent, but rather: some operatives from some of the planet's most brutally repressive regimes (after the PRC, of course) -- specifically: Bahrain, Belarus, Cuba, Eritrea, Djibouti, Iran ... there's too many to list, but I'll just add one more: the DPRK -- get together and sign a petition denying the abuses happening in another country (China) which just so happens to be a big, rich, pal of theirs, and on top of that, praising its leadership to the rafters, as it were:

"We commend China’s remarkable achievements in the field of human rights by adhering to the people-centered development philosophy and protecting and promoting human rights through development. We also appreciate China’s contributions to the international human rights cause."

And you're suggesting that we're supposed to take this seriously?

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#229

Post by president »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #168

Interesting. China seems to tick all the boxes from human rights to climate change. How comes it's not cancelled by the Twitter mob yet?

They have convinced [1] people that it is racist to criticize their nation

[1] https://gh.bmj.com/content/5/9/e003746

Re: Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

#230

Post by AnimalMuppet »

radmuzom wrote: post #223
tlear wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silica is not an issue. Intel executives getting kidnapped(err arrested for illegal blah blah), local managers disappearing, sudden "corruption" investigations etc. There are 2 choices, clear out everything and everyone associated with Intel out of PRC or comply.

Funny how China doing something are always in the future tense. Whereas the ones who have committed the atrocity of actually illegally detaining an executive by putting pressure on a friendly country is the USA.

Illegally detaining an executive is not an "atrocity". Violation of international norms, perhaps, but not an atrocity. Atrocity takes a lot higher standard than that.
Post reply on HN