Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

GalileoSeven

macrumors 6502a
Jan 3, 2015
597
826
Like a lot of other SJWs, Tim Cook is a spineless, pathetic coward. Absolutely disgusting move by him/Apple.


It's funny everyone here pretending they support human rights whilst using devices and wearing clothes assembled in chinese sweatshops.

And they have the audacity to call Apple a hypocrite for simply removing an app.


Spare us the grandstanding. What devices aren't assembled in Chinese or other low-cost sweatshops??
 

sirozha

macrumors 68000
Jan 4, 2008
1,927
2,327
Dude, please. Samsung's decision to move manufacturing out of China had absolutely ZERO to do with human rights. It had everything to do with the rising costs of manufacturing there and being able to build their phones cheaper elsewhere, like in Vietnam and India. When Samsung stops selling phones in China out of protest for human rights please get back to me.
It also had something to do with having a CEO with brains.
 

manni

macrumors regular
Mar 17, 2010
145
490
It's funny everyone here pretending they support human rights whilst using devices and wearing clothes assembled in chinese sweatshops.

And they have the audacity to call Apple a hypocrite for simply removing an app.

The point is Tim Cook over and over claims he supports "human rights". He attacks Trump for example for wanting to enforce laws on immigration. He virtue signalled about those bathroom laws. Over and over he has said that he would be guided by moral purity, not profits...

Then he bows down to the Chinese government crushing a protest.

You are right, most of us are hypocrites on this. Just like 95% of envronommentalists won't stop flying, 95% of us won't stop buying stuff made in China.

But we can at least ask for honesty. Cook got paid $136 million dollars last year. He controls the richest company in the world. His actions have far, far more consequences than whether you or I buy another iPhone. He has now shown he will do the bidding of tyrants - it's not even the sort of *innocent face* let's just build a factory there because its cheaper of previous years. It's not black and white - tyrants tell him to jump and he asks how high.
 

Wiesenlooser

macrumors 6502a
Jul 9, 2010
984
1,540
Apple is all political when it is good PR ( pride, environmental protection), but when it comes to freedom and democracy, they don’t give a damn.

that’s what I hate about it. Be unpolitical - be unpolitical, it’s okay for a tech company. But don’t cherry pick being political as long as it is easy in order To pretend to be a better company than you actually are.
 

manni

macrumors regular
Mar 17, 2010
145
490
Supporting riots is not a freedom people need.

The people of Hong Kong were promised that their freedom would continue when the British left. The new law which kicked off all the protests would have seen people at risk of being extradited to China.

China has a long and well documented history of murdering political dissidents, harvesting organs from prisoners, ethnically cleansing entire groups. Over the decades they have murdered millions - more than even Hitler or Stalin did. This is no joke.

For Apple to side with them against the protestors is obscene.
 

urtules

macrumors 6502
Jul 30, 2010
319
348
I think it's a wrong decision by Apple and I hope they will change their mind once this hits the press. It's a bad look for them.

Can someone please explain why the protests still continue when the original extradition law was revoked and even was prevented to emerge again. What's on the protesters agenda now?
[automerge]1570705414[/automerge]
Also would like to add that it's not an issue of free speech. You are free to speak whatever you want, on a platform you own. If you use someone else platform they have all the rights to ban you. For example Twitter has all the rights to ban its users if they suspect Russian or Nazi propaganda and this won't be an issue of free speech. Unfortunately Twitter too careful with keeping us "engaged" and reluctant to ban anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kostthem

Bustycat

macrumors 65816
Jan 21, 2015
1,187
2,823
New Taipei, Taiwan
The people of Hong Kong were promised that their freedom would continue when the British left. The new law which kicked off all the protests would have seen people at risk of being extradited to China.

China has a long and well documented history of murdering political dissidents, harvesting organs from prisoners, ethnically cleansing entire groups. Over the decades they have murdered millions - more than even Hitler or Stalin did. This is no joke.

For Apple to side with them against the protestors is obscene.
I think you should do some research on the reasons and facts. The new law has been suspended and now those protesters want more. Why was there the new law? A man from Hong Kong killed his girlfriend here in Taiwan and fled back to Hong Kong. Yes he is in a jail now, but that is just because he stole her bank account. He has no crime for killing his girlfriend. Initially, all senators supported this new law, until the protests happened.

I am from Taiwan so I understand the biggest enemy for us is still the Communist Party of China, but we still need to know the facts. Freedom of speech doesn’t include illegal crimes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StyxMaker and SDJim

ginkobiloba

macrumors 6502a
Jul 2, 2007
628
1,742
Paris
Apple ( and other companies ) aren't political organisations. They can express their positions on various social subjects ( which Tim Cook often does), but at the end of the day they have to conform to whatever law is applicable in the country they are doing business in. And that's how it should be, even if that law sucks, even if that government is lead by morons. If there is a law that forces them to do something, they have to obey it , period.
The only either choice is to NOT do business in that country ( which could be the right choice sometimes ).

The only group that should be allowed to decide how things should be run in any country, are its native inhabitants, its people. Not foreign businesses.
It's either that , or pull out of the country ( which did work for South Africa for example, but I doubt it will work for China unfortunately)
 
Last edited:

Romeo_Nightfall

macrumors 65816
Aug 8, 2018
1,004
881
Vienna
Yup.. Exactly. Apple made a mistake by allowing it in the first place. Making the correction wasn't easy.

But of course... the keyboard warriors here will disagree. Problem is, they are just all talk. If they truly despised Apple for this, they would stop supporting Apple and leave the eco system immediately

the thing is - THEY have put us to an all or nothing doctrine!
you can just leave everything and try to live a meaningful life somewhere or bite in the rotten apple.

of course you can buy NO smartphone, because there is not one ethical actor left. apple and google are a duopoly and even with huawei as a 3. alternative makes it no better!
 

PBG4 Dude

macrumors 601
Jul 6, 2007
4,272
4,482
Way to gargle China’s balls, Apple. I don’t see them removing Waze from the App Store, which has the same cop-tagging capabilities as this Hong Kong app.

It’s a bad look especially since Apple added the app back to the store, then removed it again after more whinging by China.
 

manni

macrumors regular
Mar 17, 2010
145
490
I think it's a wrong decision by Apple and I hope they will change their mind once this hits the press. It's a bad look for them.

Can someone please explain why the protests still continue when the original extradition law was revoked and even was prevented to emerge again. What's on the protesters agenda now?
[automerge]1570705414[/automerge]
Also would like to add that it's not an issue of free speech. You are free to speak whatever you want, on a platform you own. If you use someone else platform they have all the rights to ban you. For example Twitter has all the rights to ban its users if they suspect Russian or Nazi propaganda and this won't be an issue of free speech. Unfortunately Twitter too careful with keeping us "engaged" and reluctant to ban anyone.

For your second point - it's always far more complex than that. Human beings live in societies. It has been in the US for example well established in law that private land can be a public space where one's legal rights exist. Not many people for example believe that a business should be allowed to refuse to serve a black man. There simply isn't, in real life, the clear cut distinction you make. The internet, and twitter etc, depend on society and if it becomes the way society operates and communicates, it is emphatically of interest to the people to see free speech on that platform.

The alternative is twitter can ban people - you say they re reluctant but they have been extremely trigger happy banning people - but then they are effectively a newspaper with an editor - and have to take responsibility for their platform.

Most of these ideas were very widely accepted and settled for decades. Newspapers for example can be sued in ways a telephone company cannot. I see no reason why tech companies should be allowed to exist in some different way and sooner or later the law will catch up in just the same way tax codes will eventually catch up.

As for the protests it's a huge, long and complex issue. The wikipedia page on them is actually pretty even handed and detailed though lacks the context on this history of the past decades. Would the American Revolution have been cancelled if the tax on tea had been changed? No, that was just a spark, something that made plain a larger issue (in that case taxation without representation). It is hard to imagine how people feel in Hong Kong - a tiny place sitting right next to a blood soaked tyranny with a huge army that has made no secret of the fact it wants to totally dominate and crush Hong Kong and is held back only by the fact the world would see it. The Chinese government for example can ethnically cleanse Uighurs and largely keep it secret so do so. If they could do the same to Hong Kong they would - and that law would have been the first step. The extradition law was not some administrative detail - it meant everyone in Hong Kong could be taken to China where they would have no defence against torture and murder.

Imagine a US government in the 1960s tried to force through a law allowing the USSR to extradite anyone they wanted. And there were protests that the police tried to brutally crush, and under immense pressure the government backed down. Would everyone just say "ok great, that wasn't a big issue, glad they listened, surely they won't try anything bad again"? And then imagine the US is a tiny city state on the border of the USSR and the Russians have an army ready at the border. And then when there is a protest against the founding date of the USSR a policeman shoots a protestor. What I trying to say is the stakes are incredibly high, the pressure is immense, Hong Kong is right on the edge of an evil tyranny and the people there are giving everything they can.

To be frank I am surprised. I think in the long term it will be very hard for them to resist as the Chinese government will play the long game and slowly whittle away at freedoms and the separate culture and in 100 years I would be surprised if HK survives in the way it does today. Yet still they fight. They are the equivalent of a Jewish group resisting the Nazis in Germany in 1938. That is why so many of us are furious with Apple for siding with the tyrants so clearly.
 
Last edited:

ginkobiloba

macrumors 6502a
Jul 2, 2007
628
1,742
Paris
The point is Tim Cook over and over claims he supports "human rights". He attacks Trump for example for wanting to enforce laws on immigration. He virtue signalled about those bathroom laws. Over and over he has said that he would be guided by moral purity, not profits...

Then he bows down to the Chinese government crushing a protest.
There is one huge difference though. Tim Cook is american, not chinese, not swedish, not nigerian... As such he can agree or disagree with american laws, try to influence them, try to change them etc.. As an individual of american nationality, he can only voice his personal opinion on what is happening in another country, but he is not supposed to use his company to change the laws of foreign countries or disobey them. That is up to the people and the local businesses of the foreign country to act as they feel towards their local laws and politics.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.