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

Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 300 posts

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#291

Post by SQueeeeeL »

minimuffins wrote: post #50
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #6

I feel like this is essentially trying to sue capitalism. Of course most raw materials people get is essentially sourced from exploitation. That's just the result of buying for the cheapest cost. People don't like seeing how the sausage gets made, like the John Oliver segment on children making clothes, if they shut this down it will just pop up again with another company...

If those premises are true, it seems like the only choices available are to accept just about any level of brutality and exploitation as inevitable, or to oppose capitalism.

Correct. That's basically the argument Smith makes in Wealth of Nations.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#292

Post by solidasparagus »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #226
solidasparagus wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good example. The person who actually ended slavery in the US, Abraham Lincoln, didn't support abolition until the military advantages of emancipation became obvious enough that he could sell it to the people. For a long time he supported some slavery improvements, but specifically did not support abolition - which very much helped his political career and put him in position to emancipate.

We might also note that what Lincoln did -- the Emancipation Proclamation -- abolished slavery only in areas that were not subject to the Union, making it questionable as an act of governance. Slaves in Union territory were emancipated by the 13th amendment three years later.

> questionable as an act of governance

I disagree with this. You shouldn't fail to emancipate some slaves just because you can't emancipate them all.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#293

Post by solidasparagus »

dv_dt wrote: post #246
philipkglass wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cobalt has only one naturally occurring isotope, so I don't think you can use any tricks from chemistry or physics to track it back to the source after it has been separated from ore. Instead you need tamper-resistant supply chain documentation all the way back to the actual mine.

I'm not familiar w/ cobalt, but materials are rarely 100% pure. One might look at non-cobalt materials associated with the pure material and what ratios they're in? Again not perfect but something.

I think one of the problems is that the cobalt doesn't reach component manufacturers until it's been through a series of smelters/refiners.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#294

Post by fennecfoxen »

DSingularity wrote: post #47
shkkmo wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quick search shows that past lawsuits against Nestle and other companies for child labor in their supply chain listed consumers as the plaintiffs claiming damage from false advertising and non -disclosure [1]. These cases have ended up being dismissed. The difference is that in this case the children and their families are the actual plaintiffs which presumably changes the legal merits. I still suspect that this ca…

Raise public awareness? I think they are seeking remedy. Sad that the courts are so slanted in the favor of corporate interests. Why do these cases get dismissed?

> Sad that the courts are so slanted in the favor of corporate interests.

The courts are in favor of upholding the law, not about exacting righteousness from all people.

Cobalt is a commodity which fungible and generally available on the world market. It may be refined at several steps, purchased by one company, put in storage with cobalt from other suppliers, and resold to another company. There may be general purchase records, but there are no specific records of how the physical cobalt ore was stored in a mineral silo. There is also the possibility that records that do exist could be faked for the purpose of fraud.

It is thus not common for the law to mandate that the manufacturers know exactly what has happened to every ounce of the substances that make up their product, or for the law to make this criminality contagious, such that anyone who does business with anyone who does business with anyone who does business with slave labor goes to jail.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#295

Post by fennecfoxen »

shkkmo wrote: post #254
Nasrudith wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they are seeking remedy from the wrong parties in a fungible market without proof of more direct involvement. It being in "corporate interest" doesn't mean it is wrong. To be frank they are acting a lot like extortionists.

That's pretty harsh language to use against families whose children died mining the materials for your smart phone, electric bike and green energy grid. A "fungible market" does not make slavery ok, nor does it excuse child labor. Indeed, the availability of alternative sources would seem to make patronizing companies that support this type of bevaior more inexcusable.

Slavery is, of course, not okay. But tell me this: Are you confident that all your home electronics have zero slave-produced cobalt in it? If not, why not? The availability of alternative cobalt sources would seem to make this type of behavior inexcusable.

What's this you say? You don't have a direct relationship with the cobalt mine? You buy your phone from some company, and you don't know their exact sources of components, or whether they switch suppliers from time to time? Gasp!

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#296

Post by franga2000 »

onreact wrote: post #285
franga2000 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully that didn't come across as aggressive against Fairphone or your comment. I like Fairphone and might actually buy their phone next cycle. This is just a topic that really matters to me, as I've witnessed what happens when someone goes down the environmental responsibility rabbit hole to the point of not being able to properly function because of feeling guilty about basically every part of modern society. Ma…

You don't have to feel guilty, just make informed choices. Just giving up and taking deaths for granted is cynical. For example I went vegan and I feel much better now. I'm saving the planet while at it without "making sacrifices". Also handing over responsibility to politicians does not work. As long as people keep on trashing the planet politicians don't care. Political parties are only catering to mainstream choic…

See, I'm not giving up on anything here. If I went vegan - hell, if my entire country went vegan, not a single cow in the entire world would live in better conditions. Same with emissions, etc. We're a rounding error.

But we have some very good politicians. If I (and enough other people) vote them into our and later the EU parliament, they will in turn vote for things like sanctioning companies for shit that goes down in their supply chain, regulating animal treatment, etc. And that might actually make a difference.

People are way too cynical about politics. Changing your life is great, but it's not what will ultimately decide the outcome of this mess. Politics is where the power lies and if a person in power does not agree with you, no amount of protesting/lifestyle changes is going to make them change their minds. Politicians are not your enemy - bad politicians are. So vote those out and vote the good ones in.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#297

Post by shkkmo »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #295
shkkmo wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pretty harsh language to use against families whose children died mining the materials for your smart phone, electric bike and green energy grid. A "fungible market" does not make slavery ok, nor does it excuse child labor. Indeed, the availability of alternative sources would seem to make patronizing companies that support this type of bevaior more inexcusable.

Slavery is, of course, not okay. But tell me this: Are you confident that all your home electronics have zero slave-produced cobalt in it? If not, why not? The availability of alternative cobalt sources would seem to make this type of behavior inexcusable. What's this you say? You don't have a direct relationship with the cobalt mine? You buy your phone from some company, and you don't know their exact sources of com…

> Are you confident that all your home electronics have zero slave-produced cobalt in it?

I am confident that my electronics do indeed contain some cobalt from the exact same sort of mines referenced in the article and I do feel culpable. I wish there was an organization that tracked the degree to which the electronic companies that I purchase products from make an effort to source ethical cobalt and other sources (hence my prior question elsewhere in this thread.) I wish that Fairphone sold their products in my country. I wish that I, as an individual consumer had the level of market power that a company like samsung or google has over their supply chain and could incentivize the cobalt mining companies to behave more ethically.

You sarcasm doesn't make any actual point and to me it indicates that the reason that you are so willing to argue against the culpability of the electronics, battery and cobalt mining companies that make so much money from this is because you are unwilling to acknowledge your own culpability in the deaths of these children and the suffering of their families.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#298

Post by shkkmo »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #294
DSingularity wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Raise public awareness? I think they are seeking remedy. Sad that the courts are so slanted in the favor of corporate interests. Why do these cases get dismissed?

> Sad that the courts are so slanted in the favor of corporate interests. The courts are in favor of upholding the law, not about exacting righteousness from all people. Cobalt is a commodity which fungible and generally available on the world market. It may be refined at several steps, purchased by one company, put in storage with cobalt from other suppliers, and resold to another company. There may be general purch…

> It is thus not common for the law to mandate that the manufacturers know exactly what has happened to every ounce of the substances that make up their product, or for the law to make this criminality contagious, such that anyone who does business with anyone who does business with anyone who does business with slave labor goes to jail.

That is a strawman argument. The article quite clearly states the the claim lawsuit aims to prove is this:

"knowingly benefiting from and aiding and abetting the cruel and brutal use of young children."

Specifically, they claim there is evidence of a direct links in the supply chain:

"Certainly the supply chain is opaque. It is complex. But the plaintiffs all were injured and killed at mines owned by companies that have been publicly disclosed as sellers of cobalt to our defendants.

There is quite a bit more evidence contained in the complaint linked in the article. It is pretty clear that any "opaqueness" that does exist in the sourcing of Cobalt is a deliberate attempt to limit the perception of culpability.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#299

Post by fennecfoxen »

shkkmo wrote: post #297
fennecfoxen wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slavery is, of course, not okay. But tell me this: Are you confident that all your home electronics have zero slave-produced cobalt in it? If not, why not? The availability of alternative cobalt sources would seem to make this type of behavior inexcusable. What's this you say? You don't have a direct relationship with the cobalt mine? You buy your phone from some company, and you don't know their exact sources of com…

> Are you confident that all your home electronics have zero slave-produced cobalt in it? I am confident that my electronics do indeed contain some cobalt from the exact same sort of mines referenced in the article and I do feel culpable. I wish there was an organization that tracked the degree to which the electronic companies that I purchase products from make an effort to source ethical cobalt and other sources (h…

The point is that you are not criminally liable for trafficking in slaves under 18 U.S. Code § 1589 because you have some quantity of cobalt, and neither are the companies in question, in all likelihood. This is important because the lawsuit seeks to say that the companies are criminally liable for trafficking in slaves under 18 U.S. Code § 1589 and the lawsuit will be rendered on the merits under 18 U.S. Code § 1589.

The point is a limited one. Besides this point, reform efforts are a great idea.

Re: Tech giants sued over deaths of children who mine cobalt

#300

Post by fennecfoxen »

shkkmo wrote: post #298
fennecfoxen wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sad that the courts are so slanted in the favor of corporate interests. The courts are in favor of upholding the law, not about exacting righteousness from all people. Cobalt is a commodity which fungible and generally available on the world market. It may be refined at several steps, purchased by one company, put in storage with cobalt from other suppliers, and resold to another company. There may be general purch…

> It is thus not common for the law to mandate that the manufacturers know exactly what has happened to every ounce of the substances that make up their product, or for the law to make this criminality contagious, such that anyone who does business with anyone who does business with anyone who does business with slave labor goes to jail. That is a strawman argument. The article quite clearly states the the claim laws…

This is not a strawman argument, this is an argument of the merits of the suit. It is relevant insofar as the structure of the suit is a thing. If you sue a company for trafficking in slaves under 18 U.S. Code § 1589, the question is whether they trafficked in slaves under 18 U.S. Code § 1589, and not whether they're morally culpable. It is possible the plaintiffs will overcome the opacity, but "being injured at a company that you bought stuff from" remains, to the best of my knowledge, a highly unusual form of contagious liability, and not a feature of our current jurisprudence.

When this suit is resolved and the company is found not to be liable, as is likely, then we can talk reform efforts and opacity all day long, and we can draft new laws, and discuss the extent to which they actually help.

Post reply on HN