Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#431

Post by peoplefromibiza » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 4:45 AM UTC

galdosdi wrote: post #407

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, neither I nor the parent were talking about "legality" just sovereignty moving the goalpost much? I specifically talked about "sovereign countries recognized by the UN " So yeah, I introduced it, because it's the only thing that matters. Nobody cares about sovereignty outside of legal borders and international recognition. Are Catalans sovereign in Catalonia? Nobody cares unless they can get international recog…

Are you okay?

I am, you're still an idiot though...

Definition of sovereignty

1a: supreme power especially over a body politic

b: freedom from external control : AUTONOMY

c: controlling influence

2: one that is sovereign especially : an autonomous state

None of those definitions apply to Taiwan.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#432

Post by peoplefromibiza » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 5:07 AM UTC

ilammy wrote: post #428

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> North Korea That is inhabited by the same Koreans that live in the south and only exists for geopolitcal reasons. Just like east and west Germany. Ukraine exists because Ukranian people exist. Belgium is more of a buffer state than Ukraine (no, I'm not Ukranian, far from it)

It is not about nationality, or ethnicity, or anything else about people living there, except international recognition of the territory and the amount of sovereignty it has. It is about geopolitical situation, where states A and C happen to have state B between them. When relations between A and C go real sour, then B becomes a buffer state between them (unless B is powerful enough to kick asses of both A and C, sho…

> except international recognition of the territory and the amount of sovereignty it has

You can be 100% sovereign and be a buffer state and 0% sovereign and not be one (see French Polynesia)

> It is about geopolitical situation, where states A and C happen to have state B between them

then Germany is a buffer state, Poland is a buffer state, Israel is a buffer state, Afghanistan is a buffer state. Sweden is a buffer state, Finland is a buffer state, Bulgaria is a buffer state, Switzerland is a buffer state, Mongolia is a buffer state, Canada is a buffer state etc.

except that

Ukraine has been described as a buffer state between Russia and the NATO bloc, at least up to the ousting of former President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014

We let them be an independent Nation when they agreed to become a kinda democratic country.

Donbass is the buffer state there, between Ukraine and Russia.

As far as we are concerned, Russia is not at war with Europe or NATO, but with Ukraine, for reasons belonging entirely to a Russian-Ukraine conflict.

A buffer state is a "neutral area" that two powers agree on, Russia never really agreed on Ukraine independence and tried to make it a buffer between them and NATO. If Russia wins the war against Ukraine, then Ukraine will become a buffer state.

If Ukraine was really a buffer state, we would be at war with Russia now, we surely would be if Russia attacked Finland or Sweden or Bulgaria or Romania or Poland, because it's Europe, or if USSR entered west Germany or when Iraq invaded Kuwait etc. etc.

What happened when Yugoslavia (a buffer state) dissolved?

Do you really believe USA would have missed a chance to go to war, given the motivation?

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#433

Post by stale2002 » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 6:28 AM UTC

Ygg2 wrote: post #424

stale2002 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, actually. I do not think many people would care if Xi made some speech in texas. Mostly that sounds just funny. He can go ahead and do that.

It was a fantastical example, but I doubt US would look kindly to sedition. US doesn't look kindly to someone endangering their energy supplies. Let alone territorial integrity

That is where you would be wrong. People in the US are free to talk all they want about fantastical topics.

In fact, in Texas people make political comments about independence frequently.

In Puerto Rico, there have even been literal votes, where the people actually voted on what they want to do with this US territory, and independence was one of the options.

Further examples of these topics coming up, are the frequent comments I hear about how california, or pacific states should form up and create their own country.

And to give a more historical example, I believe a couple decades ago, there was a major Alaska independence party. This party actually even won a governorship, at one point!

People who claim that the topic of states leaving the US, is some taboo topic, that will get you sent to jail, or start a war, if people simply talk about it, are just wrong.

You are just wrong. People talk about this stuff, all the time, and there have even been official votes on this stuff. And wars aren't started over it.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#434

Post by CogitoCogito » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 6:36 AM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #390

CogitoCogito wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once again you're over-complicated this. The organization could have invited Taiwan to participate and asked them what they'd like to be called. That would certainly satisfy those questioning the organization's neutrality.

It would satisfy them because they think Taiwan is an independent country, and not satisfy China because they don't agree. Of course, you and I know that China is wrong and Taiwan really is an independent country! But that doesn't mean it's neutral to say so.

Allowing the PRC to decide what the lands they govern are called and allowing the ROC to decide that the lands they govern are called is _obviously_ more neutral than allowing either the PRC or the ROC to make the decision for both sides. Taking the PRC’s side (as that committee did) or the ROC’s side is basically the definition of “not neutral”.

China does need to be “satisfied” for it to be neutral.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#435

Post by ChoGGi » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 7:02 AM UTC

bee_rider wrote: post #364

vladvasiliu wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not American, so I may be missing some details, but is that actually not allowed? Or is it rather the case that some people may not like that, so companies try to avoid upsetting some customers?

Yes, we can put whatever odious symbols on our products. The Confederate flag is a bit weird because there's enough of the population that apparently doesn't see it that way, so some stores will even display products that have it. (Personally I find it to be an awful symbol and wouldn't stick around if I saw it displayed). An example that is more like what you've described is something like a Nazi swastika -- technic…

At least on eBay there's a lot of Nazi memorabilia for sale.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#436

Post by Apfel » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 7:59 AM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #379

CogitoCogito wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said that Taiwan's language and writing system made them Chinese. By that reasoning, the US would be English. But thanks for clarifying that sharing a language and writing system with another country, doesn't necessarily make you part of that country.

But this is not about "being part of a country"; it's first and foremost about sharing a common culture and history. Facile claims to "Taiwan independence" that ignore these nuances are tantamount to a denial of this shared past and common identity that is part of the continuing lived experience of many people in Taiwan. They are oppressive, dehumanizing and hurt the feelings of the Chinese people who live on the isl…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurting_the_feelings_of_the_...

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#437

Post by naniwaduni » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 8:04 AM UTC

dwheeler wrote: post #199

Retric wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has the 2nd largest military budget but only spends 1.7% GDP on it vs the global average of 2.2% and US at 3.5%. India the worlds 3rd largest spender is between them at 2.7% GDP, and #4 the UK spends 2.2% GDP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_... I may strongly dislike China, but a relative lack of military spending is one of their strengths.

China has the second largest military spending in the world, second only to the US. What's more, you really need to look at purchasing power parity (PPP). Basically, it costs less to do things in China, and that really matters for military spending. For example, soldiers in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) receive far lower salaries than the equivalent US personnel. It's hard to figure out the true impact o…

I'm not sure the past ten months have been the greatest time for the argument that Russia gets almost a third of the US's military value after adjusting for PPP.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#438

Post by Maursault » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 9:06 AM UTC

fallingknife wrote: post #54

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #25

I have a friend working for a company whose biggest clients are in the Emirates. One of said client is the government, and it is asking them to buy some very specific equipment, knowing fully well this equipment is only sold in Israel. However, the Emirates cannot trade with Israel, and refuse to pay for any equipment labelled as coming from this country. Calling one of the officials, they asked for a solution. They…

Why go all the way to the UK to do the swap, though?

Unlike in the US, where it is expressly against federal law to remove origin marks, and sure to attract enthusiastic prosecution, the UK has no law – Act of Parliament or secondary legislation – which generally requires products to be origin marked. The exception to this is food which is required to be origin marked under EU Regulation 1169/2011. Origin marking for all products other than food is voluntary. So that is why.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#439

Post by ekianjo » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 9:11 AM UTC

rexreed wrote: post #281

ekianjo wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone here is choosing cheaper Chinese goods so we're all complicit too. its not like we have much choice anymore as consumers. There's hardly anything made elsewhere.

It was the consumer's choice on what to buy and where to buy it from. But demand for low prices, regardless of where and how things are manufactured (overseas and in sweatshops) and lack of demand for accountability in the 1980s and 1990s when manufacturers shipped jobs and work overseas that resulted in where we are. Consumers always have choice, we've just made self-serving short-term choices.

> It was the consumer's choice on what to buy and where to buy it from

I'm sorry, can you remind me when companies offered the same product made outside of China and in China, as an alternative choice? The companies decided to go offshore, not the consumers.

Re: Apple warns suppliers to follow China rules on 'Taiwan' labeling

#440

Post by trasz » Sat, Aug 06, 2022, 9:34 AM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #413

trasz wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how’s China different here? Or do you really believe there are no conflicting opinions there? I mean, some people believe there are no public elections in China, so…

A colleague of mine who is Chinese walked by a protest in China and inadvertently checked his phone. He was interrogated by state police for almost a day during the following weekend.

And a guy in US was harassed by NSA for a YouTube video of his. Look, it’s not that this stuff doesn’t happen in China - rather, it’s also happening in US, you’ve just learned to ignore it.