[HN Gopher] Intel apologises in China over Xinjiang supplier sta...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Intel apologises in China over Xinjiang supplier statement
        
       Author : city17
       Score  : 357 points
       Date   : 2021-12-23 08:40 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.reuters.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com)
        
       | andy_ppp wrote:
       | I think we should stop using China for cheap Labour in general
       | given how hostile their government are becoming. Where possible I
       | try to buy Taiwanese, Korean and Japanese electronics.
        
         | joshuajill wrote:
         | Oh just because the government is hostile. So if the government
         | is "friendly" we can safely keep exploiting the workers? That
         | pretty much describes how the US is going.
        
         | thaumasiotes wrote:
         | > given how hostile their government are becoming
         | 
         | To the extent that they are more hostile now, that would look
         | like an effect of American attacks on them, not a cause. Causes
         | need to precede effects.
        
         | zohch wrote:
         | That there is any controversy in this statement is insane, but
         | I would be very wary of ever making this statement non-
         | anonymously, because I know I'm more likely than not to be
         | cancelled for it.
         | 
         | China has mastered the manipulation of the west's successor
         | ideology better than those in the west that instituted it.
        
           | _red wrote:
           | >China
           | 
           | Its not totally fair to put this all on Chinese manipulation.
           | 
           | Western politicians and many "tech elite" all love the
           | concept of CCP-style 'social credit systems' being
           | instituted.
           | 
           | This is ultimately what vaxpass is all about.
        
             | nix23 wrote:
             | This could have been a good point until you came up with
             | that sentence:
             | 
             | >>This is ultimately what vaxpass is all about.
             | 
             | Now it's just a stupid waste of electricity.
        
               | _red wrote:
        
               | scoopertrooper wrote:
               | Enjoy the ICU.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | Breaking the site guidelines like this will get you
               | banned here, regardless of how wrong someone else is or
               | you feel they are.
               | 
               | If you'd please review
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and
               | stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
               | 
               | Edit: fortunately you don't seem to be in the habit of it
               | (that's good).
        
               | dang wrote:
               | Please do not respond to a bad comment by breaking the
               | site guidelines yourself. That just makes everything
               | worse.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
               | 
               | Edit: we've had to warn you repeatedly in the past:
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27875046 (July 2021)
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25826399 (Jan 2021)
               | 
               | Continuing like this will get you banned here, so please
               | don't.
        
               | nix23 wrote:
               | The comments below mine just don't look like i "made"
               | something worse, quite the opposite, the comments below
               | mine are leaning more in that or the other direction, i
               | am fine with that i don't see a problem here...but
               | anyway...accepted.
        
               | zivkovicp wrote:
               | How so? Even if the intent of such programs might be
               | positive, is there not a risk of them being used to
               | limit, coerce, or change user behaviour? (it wouldn't be
               | the first time)
               | 
               | Why is this such an offensive statement?
        
               | geofft wrote:
               | There's a risk of a baseball bat being used to limit,
               | coerce, and change people's behavior, and there are
               | documented cases of them being used in that way, but
               | nobody would say that the Louisville Slugger is crypto-
               | authoritarianism.
               | 
               | Your statement isn't offensive and nobody is offended by
               | it; it's just, as the comment above said, stupid. There's
               | a difference.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | Would you please stop posting flamewar comments to HN?
               | You have a long history of doing this, even though I know
               | you've also posted lots of good things.
               | 
               | Please stick to the site guidelines:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | Social credit is offensive and freedom-limiting _by
               | definition_. You can 't make any small-d-democratic
               | argument in favor of a massive central social credit
               | system because the two are antithetical.
               | 
               | A vaccine passport system could turn into something
               | similar, but that's not necessarily a given. It's the
               | slippery slope fallacy taken to the extreme - "because
               | it's possible to imagine a situation in which a vaccine
               | passport system goes way beyond its usefulness and
               | becomes oppressive, that means vaccine passport systems
               | are oppressive." In addition to that sentiment being
               | wrong, HN also has a pretty violent knee-jerk reaction to
               | anything that could even _potentially_ be taken as anti-
               | vax sentiment. As can be seen by this garbage[0].
               | 
               | [0]
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29659905#29661353
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | Zero trolling here. I am modestly in favour of a COVID-19
               | vaccine "passport". And yes, I have considered the
               | oppression side of the argument. Why am I modestly in
               | favour? Look at how yellow fever vaccination status is
               | handled. In areas of the world where it is still endemic,
               | travelers are denied entry without a recent vaccination
               | and an official UN/WHO card to prove it. (Please leave
               | aside for a moment the idea that these cards can be fake.
               | Assume they are accurate for this discussion.)
               | 
               | Almost by small-d-democratic definition, the yellow fever
               | vaccine requirement is oppressive. However, it helps to
               | reduce the spread of yellow fever.
               | 
               | Please provide your thoughts and comments.
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | I've never traveled anywhere yellow fever is endemic so I
               | don't know a ton about it other than the vaccination
               | requirements you mention.
               | 
               | I carry my vaccination card in my wallet so I'm not
               | immediately opposed to some sort of verifiable way to
               | confirm one's vaccination status. There are absolutely
               | some instances where it makes sense to mandate it, but
               | it's wrong to try to structure society so that you can't
               | take part unless you're vaccinated. There's a point at
               | which mandates and guidelines aren't helpful anymore and
               | they become theater. I'm not going to put a mask on at
               | the entrance to a restaurant, walk ten feet to a table,
               | and take my mask off. That's theater.
               | 
               | I have unvaccinated family members. They're not changing
               | their mind, I'm done trying to change it, but they're
               | still in my family and they're not disowned or
               | excommunicated because they happen to be wrong about
               | something. Omicron seems as transmissible or slightly
               | more-so, but much less deadly. That sounds like exactly
               | what we thought multiple variants would lead to a year
               | ago. It sounds like things are in the right track and
               | we're on our way out of the forest, so to speak. But,
               | government being government, I don't see mandates slowing
               | or going away any time soon. I think what's here is here
               | to stay, whether it works or not.
        
               | zivkovicp wrote:
               | This sounds about right.
               | 
               | I'm not informed enough to comment on the virus or
               | quality/efficacy/safety of any of the vaccines, but I am
               | vaccinated, and have friends and family in both camps.
               | All I know is that this is not a naive virus, I know
               | about a dozen people who have had it, not everyone has
               | survived, but everyone who has was genuinely afraid for
               | their lives. That anecdotal evidence is enough to
               | convince me to accept a vaccine/medication because I feel
               | the risk/reward is favourable.
               | 
               | I can't bring myself to support mandated vaccination or
               | making pariahs out of those who don't share my
               | risk/reward considerations, however, because I think
               | clawing back individual liberties that we give up is much
               | harder than finding the compromises necessary to hold
               | onto them in the first place.
               | 
               | I might be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time, but I
               | would prefer compromise and tolerance to a knee-jerk
               | reaction. There is already too much bad legislation born
               | from "times of emergency" and such, no need to stoke the
               | flames.
        
               | zivkovicp wrote:
               | > Social credit is offensive and freedom-limiting by
               | definition.
               | 
               | Yes, I agree. I was defending this exact point. The
               | commenter I replied to originally seemed upset about the
               | original comment condemning vax passports.
               | 
               | I guess I didn't word my response clearly enough.
        
               | nix23 wrote:
               | To put a proof of vaccination on the same level as a
               | social credit system is just beyond, if you don't have a
               | passport you cannot travel into other country's, if your
               | dog is not vaccinated against rabbis, he cannot travel to
               | let's say Georgia.
               | 
               | I am upset because a Quanon goat thinks a vaxpass is the
               | same as a social credit system, and was just made for
               | that "ultimately"
        
               | nix23 wrote:
               | > Even if the intent of such programs might be positive,
               | is there not a risk of them being used to limit, coerce,
               | or change user behaviour?
               | 
               | Oh yes same with passports.....
        
             | dang wrote:
             | You broke the site guidelines egregiously here, and made it
             | worse downthread. We ban accounts that do that repeatedly,
             | and I'm dismayed to see that you've been doing it a lot.
             | 
             | I'm not going to ban you right now because you've also
             | posted good (for HN) comments like
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29300291 and
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28987167, but to be
             | honest, those are pretty slim pickings in the account's
             | history. That's a problem and we need you to fix it if you
             | want to keep participating here.
             | 
             | If you wouldn't mind reviewing
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking
             | the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be
             | grateful.
        
           | cnlevy wrote:
           | cancel culture doesn't originate in China. It's an evolution
           | of the western idea of equality and individualism taken to an
           | extreme
        
             | pmontra wrote:
             | Ancient Athens had ostracism [1]. It was against a single
             | person and not against ideas but given that the numbers
             | where smaller and heads carry ideas, it was more or less
             | the same thing.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism
        
             | quocanh wrote:
             | China is famously very accepting of all ideas and would
             | never ban or ostracize members of its own society for
             | perspectives that disagree with the majority's belief.
             | 
             | Yep. Definitely a western thing.
        
             | BrazzVuvuzela wrote:
             | Cancel culture isn't that either. Cancel culture is a
             | rebranding of 'shunning', which I bet predates humans as we
             | know them. I bet our social monkey predecessors had such
             | tactics figured out.
             | 
             | Read this and tell me it isn't 'cancel culture':
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunning#Overview
             | 
             | Bonus: 'shadow-banning' is stealth shunning:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunning#Stealth_shunning
        
               | hnfong wrote:
               | How about this?
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication
        
               | BrazzVuvuzela wrote:
               | Another word for basically the same thing, yes.
               | Excommunication is top-down directed shunning.
        
               | azangru wrote:
               | It's probably a combination of the two. Letting the
               | monkey instincts run wild while covering them with modern
               | fanciful words :-)
        
             | threatofrain wrote:
             | Cancelling finds its roots in the freedom of association.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Please don't use HN for generic nationalistic and ideological
           | flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys
           | what it is for.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
           | 
           | Edit: I had to ask you about this just recently
           | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29555995). Continuing
           | to abuse HN like this will end up getting you banned here, so
           | please don't.
        
           | marderfarker2 wrote:
           | I've always thought it to be the reverse, since the west has
           | the whole world at their disposal (in terms of audience and
           | technology penetration)
        
             | iszomer wrote:
             | Ever bought something you believed was _Made in Japan_ but
             | found out later it was actually _Made in China_?
        
               | marderfarker2 wrote:
               | I don't think inanimate objects can influence a person's
               | mind. However media can, especially when you see the same
               | idea repeated everywhere.
        
               | pmontra wrote:
               | If you always buy from A instead of from B, whoever they
               | are, you start enjoying a familiarity with A that you
               | don't have with B.
               | 
               | Then, not about minds but about money, you are helping A
               | with your money instead of helping B and A eventually
               | becomes more powerful than B.
        
               | iszomer wrote:
               | It can when materialistic quality is a factor in
               | purchasing decisions. For example, I recently had to buy
               | a new rice cooker and based on my prior experiences of
               | owning both Japanese and Chinese brands; the former
               | outlasted the latter by thirty years. Just because it was
               | cheap and easily sourceable doesn't discount expected
               | quality assurances.
               | 
               | I'm not saying this applies to _all_ Chinese made
               | products but something I keep in mind for all future
               | purchases.
        
               | pokepim wrote:
               | For one, chinese made Teslas are superior in quality to
               | American ones. So looks like you are right, not every
               | chinese product should be seen as inferior to japanese or
               | even American.
        
               | jtdev wrote:
               | Yes, it's one reason that I let my Amazon Prime
               | membership lapse and rarely purchase anything from Amazon
               | now.
        
         | drekk wrote:
        
           | tombh wrote:
        
             | ekianjo wrote:
             | Surely the soviets killing dozens of millions of russians
             | and invading half of Europe is all the fault of the evil
             | West.
             | 
             | Sounds like you went around the world with a narrative
             | preset in your mind.
        
               | tombh wrote:
               | Dozens of millions? You want to talk history? How many
               | slaves were taken from Africa? How many Indians did
               | Churcill starve? How many Native Americans died from
               | colonialism?
               | 
               | You think you have a big number, but you don't even know
               | the half of it.
        
               | patch_collector wrote:
               | Slaves taken from Africa seem to be about 12 million over
               | the course of 400 years. Churchill apparently was
               | responsible for about 1.5 million dying by famine, plus
               | another 2-3 million by epidemics (this is dwarfed by the
               | up to 73 million that died by famine in the 200 years of
               | British rule that preceded Churchill). Native Americans
               | who died by colonialism is harder to count, because of
               | very poor estimates of how many people were around before
               | 1492 -- estimates range from 15 million inhabitants to
               | 145 million. Current estimates seem to be about 100
               | million dying as a result of both disease and intentional
               | genocide over the course of 500 years.
               | 
               | Put all of those deaths together, and we'll say
               | 
               | So all that to say, a lot of people have died in the
               | things you've named, coming out to a little under 1
               | million per year. So dozens of millions dying per year is
               | still a staggeringly large number (though helped along by
               | how many people lived in the 20th century, compared to
               | earlier centuries -- I didn't compare using a percentage
               | of the world population.)
        
               | mikem170 wrote:
               | Lots of people have narratives preset in their minds.
               | Often supplied by the evening news. That applies to both
               | the U.S. and China. So it's interesting to hear a
               | different perspective, isn't it?
        
               | dang wrote:
               | Flamewar comments like this are not ok on HN. Please
               | don't take threads further into generic flamey hell--it's
               | repetitive, predictable, and tedious. And definitely
               | please don't cross into personal attack, regardless of
               | how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. That's
               | seriously not cool.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
             | mikem170 wrote:
             | It appears to be the nature of large governments that they
             | turn into bullies. Pretty much whatever they think they can
             | get away with.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | Your downvotes are not because of propaganda. They are
             | because your entire argument is whataboutism. When someone
             | says X is bad and you respond with "but Y is also bad,"
             | that's not an argument--it's off-topic and irrelevant.
             | 
             | Any time I want to show someone what whataboutism is, I
             | send them to a China thread on HN or Reddit. It's evidently
             | one of the only tactics left in the "defend China" toolbox.
        
               | tombh wrote:
               | Whataboutism has become the very thing it sought to
               | avoid. You are the one who has now taken this off topic.
               | The comment above me is not a _direct_ response to the
               | article, it is a response to a suggestion to boycott
               | China. And my comment is a response to that comment,
               | _specifically_ about the fact that they are being
               | downvoted.
               | 
               | You embody exactly that which Whataboutism seeks to
               | overcome.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | Please don't invoke canned arguments like "whataboutism"
               | as flamewar ammunition on HN. It's a classic type of
               | generic ideological tangent that the site guidelines ask
               | to avoid. It's also bad logic, despite how often and how
               | eagerly people repeat it.
               | 
               | https://hn.algolia.com/?query=whataboutism%20by:dang&date
               | Ran...
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | Sure thing dang. I should know by now it's pointless to
               | get involved in these particular threads. Good call.
        
           | philliphaydon wrote:
           | China is involved in no less than 18 different border
           | disputes. Is encroaching on India territory. Bribed Solomon
           | Island government to switch. Refuses to abide by the law of
           | the seas. Is debt trapping nations in Africa and claiming
           | they aren't because they don't directly take control of the
           | projects and instead have Chinese businesses buy large
           | portions of ports and natural resources. Abusing trade
           | agreements. Threatening everyone under the sun. Lied about
           | covid. Tried to cover it up. Spreading propaganda about how
           | it started everywhere other than China. Holding Canada
           | citizens hostage. Persecuting races and religions and ethic
           | minorities. Destroying religious buildings under the guise of
           | "illegal structures". Building wind and solar farms on land
           | stolen from farmers.
           | 
           | List could go on forever.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Please don't use HN for generic nationalistic flamewar.
             | It's exactly what this site is not for.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
             | 
             | Edit: you've unfortunately been doing this a ton - in fact
             | you may even be using HN primarily for nationalistic battle
             | at this point. That's seriously not ok (regardless of which
             | country you have a problem with) and we ban accounts that
             | do it. If you'd please review
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and fix
             | this, I'd appreciate it.
             | 
             | Edit: this has been a problem for a long time:
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29407968
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22893867
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22880789
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22827321
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22827309
             | 
             | As I seem to have already told you more than once, I don't
             | want to ban you because you've been here for a long time
             | and also made good contributions. But if you persist in not
             | using the site as intended, we're going to end up having
             | you. So would you please fix this?
        
             | tombh wrote:
             | You are so out of your league here. Whilst you state facts,
             | it is comical to imply that China can hold a candle to the
             | West's atrocities. 18 different border disputes, 18!?? I
             | mean how can you seriously think that's a big number? Just
             | take the American continent itself. Honestly, think about
             | it for a second, what if North America was inhabited by
             | Mandarin-speakers from northern China and South America was
             | inhabited by Cantonese-speakers from southern China? Of
             | course with the occasional "Euro-towns" scattered around
             | selling pizzas. It sounds like a dystopia doesn't it, so
             | why was it ok for Europe to do that? Don't you see how
             | blinded by propaganda you are?
        
               | ChrisClark wrote:
               | You seem to be attacking Western governments assuming we
               | want to defend them?
               | 
               | Our identity it's not tied to our governments, unlike
               | you, we criticize them ALL the time. They do horrible
               | things, but because a Western government has done
               | horrible things doesn't mean China gets to do it too.
               | 
               | We are not attacking you as a Chinese citizen, we are
               | attacking the governments who do wrong.
               | 
               | This comment chain is specifically about China's
               | government's atrocities. If every time we criticized one
               | government, we had to include all of them in the same
               | post, that would be insane trying to list every single
               | thing.
        
               | tombh wrote:
               | It seems you may think I'm Chinese? I'm actually 100%
               | British.
               | 
               | I think something to bear in mind with the topic of
               | comparing the West and China is that they aren't actually
               | 2 independent entities that have now come of age, each
               | imposing its unique stamp on the world. What China is
               | today is fundamentally defined by European colonialism.
               | Chinese culture is actually thousands of years older than
               | European culture, and for the majority of human history
               | was the most advanced, richest and successful, at least
               | certainly in comparison to Europe pre and post the
               | Romans. Now recall what Europe did to Native American,
               | African and Australian cultures, which cover almost half
               | the planet. China has something called The Century of
               | Humiliation[1]. Those colonial forces that banished the
               | Cherokee, the Inca, the Mbundu, the aborigines, to the
               | pages of history, eventually arrived in China, and I
               | think quite understandably China fought tooth and nail to
               | avoid the same fate.
               | 
               | So when I criticise those in the West that criticise
               | China, I'm not just trying to equalise the argument to
               | include criticism of all governments. China is not just
               | another evil empire. Modern China is specifically what
               | happens when you have the desire, and more importantly
               | means, to defend yourself against the forces of Western
               | colonialism. China famously burnt its colonial fleet in
               | the 15th Century[2], they are actually not a naturally
               | colonial culture. A metaphor could be something like:
               | when you punch so many people so hard, that most of them
               | die, it's impossible for them to criticise your
               | behaviour, because they're, well dead. So when one of
               | them, after seeing all the dead people, and then getting
               | punched themselves, manages to survive, and even starts
               | to return punches in order to survive, those "fists" of
               | criticism are an extremely understandable survival
               | instinct.
               | 
               | Pointing the finger at China's "punches" is profoundly
               | ironic, because not only have we thrown more punches, and
               | caused more destruction, but we incited those punches.
               | 
               | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation
               | 
               | 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ming_treasure_voyages#Ca
               | uses_o...
        
               | philliphaydon wrote:
               | I'm unsure how you can justify the present based on what
               | happened in the past. It just sounds like you're making
               | excuses for justification.
               | 
               | China has a long history colonialism, just like pretty
               | much any other empire in history. So unsure how you can
               | claim they don't have colonial nature.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | You've broken the site guidelines egregiously here.
               | 
               | Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar,
               | regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are.
               | Not only does it take the community further into hell--
               | just what we don't want, and good for nobody--but you
               | actually discredit your own point of view when you post
               | like this. If you happen to be advocating for the truth,
               | or some aspect of it, that means discrediting the truth
               | as well. This hurts everybody.
               | 
               | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&
               | sor...
               | 
               | I know how difficult and frustrating it is to be
               | advocating a minority view whilst feeling surrounded by
               | endless wrongness on the internet, but at least on HN, if
               | you're going to wade into such swamps, you need to build
               | capacity to do so thoughtfully, neutrally, without
               | swipes, and so on. That's not easy, but we all need to
               | work on it.
               | 
               | Railing and fulminating against wrongness (e.g.
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29661759) actually
               | feeds the wrongness you're seeking to counter. You're
               | gifting it with new feelings of validation and
               | righteousness when you do that. This is not in your
               | interest, and it's damaging to the community (such as it
               | is) here.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
               | Archio wrote:
               | Don't you see that an eye for an eye makes the whole
               | world blind? Hey you know what, at least we can both
               | criticize the West's atrocities and not fear being
               | disappeared by an authoritarian government.
        
               | tombh wrote:
               | In what way did George Floyd not disappear? Blackness
               | isn't even an outspoken geopolitical position, yet
               | significantly more African Americans have disappeared,
               | whether literally, or effectively in prisons, than
               | Chinese dissidents. I don't want to suggest your white
               | and middle-class, but the world really is only
               | politically safe for what is actually a global minority,
               | namely the white middle class.
               | 
               | But it's way, way worse than that. At the most surface
               | level there's Julian Assange, he's not even from the
               | country that he'll be disappeared in. But deeper than his
               | case are the cases that he actually highlighted, US war
               | crimes. The US with formal support from Europe has had a
               | decades long foreign policy of violently destroying
               | communism (see the history of South America and South
               | East Asia). Communism has its fair share of evil, but
               | like it or not, it is a fundamentally valid criticism of
               | the West's capitalism. 10s of millions of innocent well-
               | meaning communist supporters have been killed whether
               | directly or through Western support, by the West.
               | 
               | China is not good, but it's just not comparable in scale
               | to the West's evils. Indeed I believe it shows a
               | profound, albeit typical, ignorance of history to think
               | that China is a comparable threat to the world.
        
           | mikem170 wrote:
           | It is interesting that nobody discusses the psychology around
           | bringing up the other sides perspective.
           | 
           | Why do these discussions tend to be so NOT nuanced or
           | objective? Each side has a different view of the same events,
           | different populations are fed different propaganda. Why are
           | we seeing certain stories in the news and not others? Why at
           | this time? Why the aggressive downvotes at the mention of
           | other perspectives, with replies kind of shouting back and
           | forth? Isn't there anything to be gained examining things
           | from both sides? etc
        
             | AnimalMuppet wrote:
             | There's too many discussions in the past that have gone
             | bad. I mean, there are too many times when the subject is
             | what China is doing in Xinjiang, and people bring up
             | slavery or US militarism or whatever, not because they want
             | to compare and contrast and _learn_ , but because they want
             | to distract from an honest discussion of what China is
             | doing in Xinjiang.
             | 
             | And the exact same thing happens on the other side, for the
             | same reasons. Try to talk about US militarism, and people
             | bring up China and Xinjiang.
             | 
             | So when you're in a discussion about one side of that, and
             | someone brings up the other side of that, the priors lean
             | toward it being bad faith. Because there has been so much
             | bad faith in the past, it's hard to believe that someone
             | bringing it up now is doing so in good faith.
             | 
             | If you want to actually have that discussion, you almost
             | certainly can't do it in a thread that started off talking
             | about one side or the other. You'd have to begin in a
             | neutral place. (I don't know if you can pull it off even
             | there...)
        
         | enkid wrote:
         | Don't many of these companies still do final assembly in China?
         | Foxconn is notorious for it's labor practices in China, but is
         | a Taiwanese company. How can someone separate Chinese assembly
         | from the rest of the product?
        
           | alisonkisk wrote:
        
         | xwolfi wrote:
         | If we can't employ Xinjian people anymore, what do you propose
         | we do with them ?
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Please don't take HN threads further into generic flamewar.
           | It's precisely the hell we want to avoid here.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | dkjaudyeqooe wrote:
           | Set them free.
        
             | trasz wrote:
        
               | splitstud wrote:
               | Everything you just said is meaningless evasion. Glow
               | more.
        
               | trasz wrote:
               | It's not evasion, it's a simple, easily verifiable fact
               | that directly contradicts your claim.
        
             | yorwba wrote:
             | Surely being free and employed is better than being free
             | and unemployed.
        
             | drekk wrote:
             | The onus is on you to show that they aren't. Have you been
             | to Xinjiang? Prior to the pandemic one could simply visit
             | and see for themselves
        
           | BrazzVuvuzela wrote:
           | _" Do with them"_? That's a truly chilling way to speak of
           | _people_.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Obviously the parent was being rhetorical. Please don't
             | take HN threads further into generic flamewar. It's
             | precisely the hell we want to avoid here.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
               | BrazzVuvuzela wrote:
        
         | joshuajill wrote:
        
           | mxmilkiib wrote:
           | Why not both?
        
             | joshuajill wrote:
             | Sure, I avoid both to some extent. What worries me the most
             | though is smart people taking sides based on mostly
             | propaganda and feeding an escalation of a situation already
             | on the brink of a war.
             | 
             | I mean why choose between Chinese authoritarian regime and
             | the US aggressive and destructive foreign policy?
        
               | mrtranscendence wrote:
               | But avoiding Chinese products doesn't necessarily mean
               | taking a stand in a propaganda war. Is China using forced
               | labor? If so, is that worth a response of some kind?
               | These questions are orthogonal to whether the US is worth
               | protesting for its own sins.
        
               | joshuajill wrote:
               | It is propagandist and borderline racist. There are
               | factories in China with working conditions comparable or
               | better then in the US. Remember the middle class is
               | growing in China and diminishing in the US.
               | 
               | https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/the-state-of-
               | amer... https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-
               | insights/mapp...
        
         | tomohawk wrote:
         | Especially given the horrors of forced organ transplants from
         | prisoners by the CCP.
         | 
         | https://chinatribunal.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/ChinaTr...
        
         | einpoklum wrote:
         | Umm, with respect - it is the US anti-Chinese rhetoric that is
         | changing, rather than Chinese government policy.
         | 
         | There are many repressive aspects to the Chinese regime (and
         | government specifically I suppose); but this is probably less
         | the case today then, say, 30 years ago. Certainly I doubt very
         | much repression has been tightened over the past few years.
         | 
         | If I'm mistaken - please provide references, preferably to non-
         | US-aligned media sources.
         | 
         | *Edit:* Hong-Kong situation notwithstanding.
        
           | mrloop wrote:
           | The final judgement at https://chinatribunal.com makes somber
           | reading about forced organ harvesting from prisoners in China
           | and its increase in the last 20 years.
        
             | trasz wrote:
             | Funny how people blindly trust a private company with no
             | public mandate just because they called themselves a
             | "Tribunal" and call their press releases "judgements".
        
           | markdown wrote:
           | > If I'm mistaken - please provide references
           | 
           | Yesterday:
           | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/12/22/hong-kong-
           | pi...
        
           | KennyBlanken wrote:
           | The burden is on the person making a claim, not on others to
           | disprove it. Furthermore, "no US aligned media sources" is ad
           | hominem. Objective facts don't become falsehoods because of
           | who is saying them.
           | 
           | Since you've formed the opinion that Chinese government
           | policy hasn't become more repressive, and that opinion is
           | clearly educated, surely you have plenty of links to give us
           | to back up your position.
        
             | dazsnow wrote:
             | Listen to the Sinica podcast. It covers China-related
             | topics "without fear nor favor". You'll here politicians
             | and experts talk about the increasing, and often baseless,
             | hostility of Western media over the past 5 years.
        
               | thow-58d4e8b wrote:
               | To add to that - putting aside the present state of Sino-
               | US relations, our prior beliefs should reflect what
               | academic work on lying in politics tells us (1):
               | 
               | * lying in official diplomatic relationships between
               | countries is rather rare
               | 
               | * within countries, democratic leaders are much more
               | likely to lie to their population than autocrats
               | 
               | * countries with imperial ambitions and long-distance
               | ventures lie more often than others
               | 
               | * within great powers, the depiction of the rival great
               | powers is especially lie-ridden
               | 
               | In other words, for a person living in the US - it's
               | likely that whatever US news sources tell you about China
               | (or Russia) is mostly lies or exaggerations
               | 
               | (1) https://www.oxonianreview.org/wp/international-
               | deceit/
        
             | hkt wrote:
             | Objective facts can become very hard to discern in a highly
             | partisan environment though. That's the problem with how
             | lots of US (and UK, etc) media works: there's obvious
             | partisanship which can make it hard to extract the truth.
             | Everything ends up as "the truth + highly political framing
             | devices". There is no outside to observe from.
        
               | Traster wrote:
               | There's obvious partisanship in uk and us media, but the
               | difference vs totalitarian states like China, is that the
               | partisanship is in a thousand different directions. So in
               | the US or UK you have access to all agendas and can
               | reason for yourself about what is true. If Fox says
               | something untrue MSNBC will point it out, if the New York
               | Times gets something wrong it'll be all over OAN. If AOC
               | lies about something you'll have Lauren Boebert screaming
               | about it. By having a free media it allows you to form
               | the correct view by holding your views and others up to
               | scrutiny.
               | 
               | In comparison, in China if the state media decides to lie
               | for its partisan reasons then there is no where you can
               | go to hear the truth so you never can distinguish the
               | truth and we have a thousand different examples of that
               | happening.
        
               | RyEgswuCsn wrote:
               | > If Fox says something untrue MSNBC will point it out,
               | if the New York Times gets something wrong it'll be all
               | over OAN. If AOC lies about something you'll have Lauren
               | Boebert screaming about it.
               | 
               | And if all these media outlets say Russia/China/Iraq/Iran
               | is evil at the same time, then it must be true, right?
        
             | yorwba wrote:
             | 1990 (still roughly qualifies as 30 years ago, I guess):
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baren_Township_conflict
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | > Hong-Kong situation notwithstanding.
           | 
           | They're currently removing the Tianamen commemoration statue.
        
             | throwaway2037 wrote:
             | For other readers who are not familiar, here are two
             | newspaper articles about it:
             | 
             | https://hongkongfp.com/2021/12/23/breaking-fears-for-
             | condemn...
             | 
             | https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-
             | kong/article/3160744/universi...
        
           | roca wrote:
           | I have personally spoken with mainland Chinese Christians who
           | report increasing persecution there.
        
             | trasz wrote:
        
           | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
           | _> Umm, with respect - it is the US anti-Chinese rhetoric
           | that is changing, rather than Chinese government policy._
           | 
           | 100% - but such a sentence also needs to come with a
           | disclaimer explaining that it doesn't mean the CCP regime
           | isn't guilty of killing millions of its own people over the
           | years and that any ideology or technology they export needs
           | to be viewed as such.
        
           | cgio wrote:
           | It has tightened e.g. in HK and significantly so. With these
           | things it's not a matter of averaging oppression to judge the
           | level. If a specific group of people, geographic area, etc.
           | are being targeted you don't really judge based on how the
           | rest are doing.
        
             | pokepim wrote:
             | Do you actually believe there is some sort of repression in
             | HK? Black people are more repressed in the US than anyone
             | in HK... I just visited HK on a business trip (had to
             | quarantine) and there were no signs of oppression or any
             | sort of police brutality at all.
        
           | ratww wrote:
           | Well, OP didn't really complain about government policy or
           | repression, but rather about hostility. Even if there are no
           | repressive aspects (but I agree with other replies that they
           | do exist!), the behaviour would still be problematic in
           | itself.
           | 
           | And it's not just an US thing, btw. Many nations perceive
           | dealing with China as walking on eggshells.
        
           | logicchains wrote:
           | >If I'm mistaken - please provide references, preferably to
           | non-US-aligned media sources.
           | 
           | Here's an official Chinese government source defending the
           | use of labour/"re-education" camps in Xinjiang: http://www.ch
           | inadaily.com.cn/a/201903/19/WS5c9033f0a3106c65c... . In past
           | the Chinese government didn't send large numbers of people to
           | camps based on their ethnicity.
        
             | yumraj wrote:
             | > In past the Chinese government didn't send large numbers
             | of people to camps based on their ethnicity.
             | 
             | No they just occupied whole of Tibet and converted the
             | whole area into a re-education camp while working to wipe
             | out local culture.
        
             | einpoklum wrote:
             | The relevant section of that article is Section V.
             | 
             | China has had a system of labor/re-education camps in the
             | past, named laojiao:
             | 
             | https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/02/c
             | h...
             | 
             | These were supposedly abolished in 2013, but in fact many
             | of them may have been rebranded using other titles, see:
             | 
             | https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2013/12/china-s-re-
             | ed...
             | 
             | and this is why I was making the point that such policies
             | are not new.
             | 
             | That being said - the article you linked to really sends
             | chills down one's spines, and just reading the Chinese
             | government's self-justification for forced interment of
             | people not convicted nor charged with any crime indeed
             | serves to emphasize the repressive nature of this practice.
        
             | baybal2 wrote:
             | > In past the Chinese government didn't send large numbers
             | of people to camps based on their ethnicity.
             | 
             | In past the Chinese government did send large numbers of
             | people to camps based on their ethnicity.
             | 
             | Tibetans - since 1957
             | 
             | Mongols - since its first years
             | 
             | Miao/Yao - 1982
             | 
             | Koreans - Koreans Chinese were routinely rounded up every
             | time NK-China affairs were flaring up since seventies
             | 
             | And Uighurs were in, and out of concentration/extermination
             | camps many times already in the past. In 1949, 1967, 1976,
             | 1991, 1998
        
               | RyEgswuCsn wrote:
               | First time learning about these. Any sources?
        
             | rfoo wrote:
             | > In past the Chinese government didn't send large numbers
             | of people to camps based on their ethnicity.
             | 
             | Before 2003 the Chinese government just randomly pull
             | people off street and if they can't prove (i.e. by showing
             | an ID card) they live in this city they go to a camp [1],
             | and this happened everywhere.
             | 
             | Heck, even less than 20 years ago.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custody_and_repatriation
        
       | zivkovicp wrote:
       | This is one of those "damned if you, and damned if you don't"
       | type situations.
       | 
       | I'm sure all they really want is to maintain their margins, which
       | makes turning the other cheek to potential human rights abuses
       | that much more sinister... but making a commitment to higher
       | ethical standards risks putting them out of business (Intel has
       | been poorly managed for years already), which would make this a
       | futile effort.
        
       | bell-cot wrote:
       | Perhaps Reuters is glossing over the way in which Intel's letter
       | phrased things, but it certainly sounds as if they were _utterly_
       | clueless about the subject being politically sensitive. Vs. (say)
       | "Per U.S. law [exact, legalistic citation], signed into law on
       | [date] by [President], Intel is legally forced to require that
       | [dull, narrow, legalistic description of requirement, free of any
       | hot-buttons]." Placed amid similar citations of other new laws -
       | some of them Chinese - which affect Intel's supply chain.
       | 
       | Arguments about whether or not the third rail should carry 10,000
       | volts can be made all day. But corporate management that gets
       | electrocuted because they were simply oblivious needs to be
       | replaced.
        
       | undecisive wrote:
       | _> Intel, which has 10,000 employees in China, said in its
       | apology that it  "respected the sensitivity of the issue in
       | China."_
       | 
       | This reminds me of a recent British politics round-table
       | interview, where a member of the ruling party told the world that
       | we shouldn't call politicians liars - despite the current Prime
       | Minister lying through his teeth at almost every opportunity
       | simply because he can get away with it - because it would
       | undermine people's faith in the political system that keeps lying
       | to them.
       | 
       | It seems that saying the things that need to be said about the
       | political systems that need to be called out is not as important
       | as getting the money (or savings) that the countries attached to
       | those political systems can generate.
       | 
       | Or, as a great man once sang:                   For china
       | (f'china x 4) is a country that can bring us to our knees.
       | 
       | Not sure there's a solution to this though. Power will always
       | corrupt.
        
         | namdnay wrote:
         | > a member of the ruling party told the world that we shouldn't
         | call politicians liars - despite the current Prime Minister
         | lying through his teeth at almost every opportunity simply
         | because he can get away with it - because it would undermine
         | people's faith in the political system that keeps lying to
         | them.
         | 
         | I didn't follow the event, but I have to agree with whoever
         | said that. There's nothing more toxic to democracy than people
         | just saying "ah politicians are all liars anyway". That's
         | exactly what post-truth politicians like Johnson, Trump and
         | Putin want you to believe - it's all a big joke anyway, so who
         | cares?
        
           | gelert wrote:
           | What's toxic to democracy is politicians lying, and then
           | telling us that p;ointing out their moments of hypocrisy is
           | what's doing the real damage. Describing reality is never
           | bad.
        
             | tiahura wrote:
             | Politicians have been lying since the origin of politics.
             | The modern press' penchant for shouting liar every time a
             | politician they don't like speaks is juvenile and
             | patronizing to the audience.
        
               | zarzavat wrote:
               | Why not both? The media is full of liars, yes - two words
               | "Daily Mail" or "Fox News" if you are American.
               | 
               | Politics is also full of liars. Boris Johnson being a
               | prime example.
               | 
               | I don't know what the solution is but I suspect it lies
               | in removing egoism from the system. Something more like
               | Switzerland's governing council rather than an individual
               | leader that just attracts narcissistic individuals.
        
             | whoopdedo wrote:
             | There's a world of difference between "This politician is
             | lying to you." and "All politicians are lying to you." One
             | is a statement against a single incident which can be
             | refuted or supported by additional facts. The other is an
             | unprovable blanket statement which begs the question of
             | whether the government can be trusted.
        
               | syshum wrote:
               | The question "can government be trusted" is long answered
               | with a resounding NO it can not
               | 
               | Government like fire is a useful servant, but a fearful
               | master.
               | 
               | This is why we have separation of powers, checks and
               | balances, and a federalist system in the US, because we
               | understand government can never, and should never be
               | trusted.
               | 
               | Government is control, government is fear, government is
               | power. Power Corrupts, and the only way to prevent that
               | corruption is to deny power, to check power, to
               | distribute power.
        
               | namdnay wrote:
               | This is all well and nice in theory, but in practice a
               | feeble government just means leaving abandoning the weak
               | to the whims of the strong
        
               | syshum wrote:
               | Ironically I view giving democratic governments more
               | power as abandoning the weak to the whims of the
               | majority, which we have seen time and time again in
               | history even recent history
               | 
               | Democracy after all is 2 wolves and lamb voting on what
               | is for dinner, a constitutional republic backed by
               | distributed governance is the lamb having rights to tell
               | the majority to f' off
        
           | sumedh wrote:
           | > want you to believe
           | 
           | Are you claiming that politicians are not liars?
        
             | namdnay wrote:
             | That's exactly the kind of easy cynicism that serves no-
             | one.
             | 
             | Yes, everyone lies, politicians and non-politicians.
             | "you're looking good", "our product already does this", "i
             | was just about to do that", "it's our highest priority"...
             | and in a job where you are constantly being asked to
             | satisfy everyone, of course there are going to be fibs.
             | 
             | But there are relatively honest politicians and there are
             | absolute sociopaths like Johnson, and it's important to
             | differentiate the two
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _there are relatively honest politicians_
               | 
               | Part of the problem is good politicians are agents of
               | compromise. When a culture ceases to be able to find
               | compromise, a direction online echo chambers and social
               | media are driving ours, then a politician who wins 90% in
               | exchange for giving 10% comes back a liar. They said they
               | were going to get 100%!
        
       | themitigating wrote:
       | Karry Wang said he would no longer serve as brand ambassador for
       | Intel, adding in a statement that "national interests exceed
       | everything".
       | 
       | That's such an insane statement. It basically says
        
       | themitigating wrote:
       | Karry Wang said he would no longer serve as brand ambassador for
       | Intel, adding in a statement that "national interests exceed
       | everything".
       | 
       | Everything?
        
         | kerneloftruth wrote:
         | Yes, that's the mentality. And, by "national interests", they
         | mean "CCP interests" -- there's no distinction between "the
         | party" and the nation.
        
           | formerly_proven wrote:
           | The civilization is the nation is the party.
        
       | tjpnz wrote:
       | Is there a list of companies who've made similar apologies in the
       | past? When presented with a choice I would prefer to avoid them.
        
         | 323 wrote:
         | In fashion: Nike, Versace, Coach, Givenchy, Calvin Klein,
         | Asics, Swarovski, Dior
         | 
         | https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/fashion-beauty/article/303950...
        
           | throw10920 wrote:
           | Blizzard! John Cena (although not a company)
        
             | johnzim wrote:
             | I think it warrants inclusion, he was clearly speaking on
             | behalf of his 'brand' and ought to be considered in the
             | same company as other commercial entities. Or you could
             | construe it as an apology on behalf of whatever movie
             | studio he was working with at the time.
        
           | tiahura wrote:
           | Marriott
        
         | ekianjo wrote:
         | probably close to 100% of them. It will be difficult to
         | organize a boycott.
         | 
         | The next best thing is to rank them by order of who knelt the
         | fastest to China.
        
           | throwaway2048 wrote:
           | I very much doubt close to 100% of companies have issued
           | apologies to china
        
         | hker wrote:
         | Check out this list on reddit:
         | 
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/dfg1ce/list_of_co...
         | "List of companies under China's censorship orders (so far).
         | Credit to u/lebe"
        
       | 737min wrote:
       | " We apologise for the trouble caused to our respected Chinese
       | customers.." Andy Grove, a Holocaust survivor, must be turning
       | over in his grave.
        
         | norealathrowwy wrote:
        
       | rayiner wrote:
       | In a dark way I'm enjoying this. China has these "masters of the
       | universe" on a leash and isn't afraid to give a good yank to
       | bring them to heel.
        
         | foobiekr wrote:
         | Did you live through the late 80s when Japan had a similar
         | psychological hold on a lot of US companies and decision
         | makers?
         | 
         | It may be somewhat entertaining, but it is not a good thing.
         | That said, it will be very funny if China suffers the same sort
         | of historical path that Japan did after the failure of the 5th
         | gen and the bubble. Housing prices as a multiple of income are
         | actually worse in Shanghai right now than they were at the peak
         | of Japan, Inc.
        
       | beebeepka wrote:
       | Bombing and pillaging countries left and right for more than half
       | a century - totally fine, we're bringing democracy to the
       | savages.
       | 
       | Becoming an economic threat to the empire - bad, very bad.
       | Anything you do is bad because human rights, environment, blah
       | blah
       | 
       | The lack of self reflection is staggering. I expect to get
       | flagged immediately, of course. Can't go against the narrative
        
       | dazsnow wrote:
        
         | undecisive wrote:
         | You're not wrong. But I think that's more a culture thing.
         | 
         | The media - not just traditional print media - is feeling
         | increasingly fragile since the shift away from newspapers.
         | 
         | So while there's an appetite for it, news sites will cover any
         | topic that needs covering. So, for example, the existence of
         | Bolsonaro would have mostly gone under the radar had the septic
         | spraytan not endorsed him, at which point the media felt it
         | could start calling out the BS that was coming from there.
         | 
         | But it isn't just the slimy swampcleaner salesman, when
         | antisemitism scandals that mention Israel erupt, that becomes
         | an acceptable time to talk about their bad behaviour, under the
         | guise of "these are the legitimate criticisms that this person
         | is / could be raising". Do Israel stop being human rights
         | abusers when antisemitism is not in the news? Of course not.
         | But it isn't seen as newsworthy enough unless something local
         | has piqued our interest.
         | 
         | When people are killed in racist attacks by american cops, BLM
         | activism and systemic racism become part of the news cycle
         | again. Does racism stop whenever there hasn't been a high-
         | profile racist murder recently? Of course not. But without that
         | hook, people looking to follow the story won't be clicking on
         | every link.
         | 
         | And unlike traditional newspaper, where you could buy the thing
         | just for the crossword and the advertisers will still pay, only
         | the individual stories and individual page loads bring revenue.
         | And so the media can no longer afford to finance investigative
         | journalism that might not resonate with the public.
         | 
         | So I don't think it's that the rhetoric that has changed. News
         | cycles are responding to what they think our attention span is,
         | based on the numbers they see in the ad revenue. And in this
         | specific instance, while China has had an uneasy relationships
         | with the Uighurs since at least the 1950s, it's the secret and
         | courtless detention and "reeducation" centres that have really
         | got people riled up (shhh... don't mention Guantanamo) and
         | that's only been happening since around 2017.
        
       | rg111 wrote:
       | China has got a massive consumer market, an unmatched
       | manufacturing ecosystem with zero labor disputes among other
       | things, minerals, arguably the most stable (in terms of violence,
       | unrest, strikes, etc.) regions in the world, and more.
       | 
       | They have got anyone by their balls who remotely wants to _sell_
       | anything in China.
       | 
       | John Cena (famous wrestler, entertainer) recently apologized to
       | Chinese people after calling Taiwan a country [0].
       | 
       | The companies and people who never go beyond their own selfish
       | self-interests, will keep kowtowing to China (and KSA as well).
       | 
       | I don't judge this. I possibly would do the same. But I am not a
       | hypocrite.
       | 
       | Apple used Chinese slave labor [1], Cook agreed to work with
       | Chinese propaganda arm [2], but fired a techie for writing a
       | satire [3].
       | 
       | All actors and actresses (who says nothing against China, where
       | two or three decades ago, the whole of Hollywood was very pro-
       | Tibet) preach freedom, self-empowerment or whatever woke thing is
       | hot in that year, and yet choose regularly to censor and/or
       | change content based on China's demand [4].
       | 
       | Intel is doing nothing new, and we will see this trend continue
       | at least for a while now.
       | 
       | [0]: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/actor-john-cena-
       | apologize....
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/10/22428899/apple-
       | suppliers-...
       | 
       | [2]: https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/apples-
       | tim-...
       | 
       | [3]: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/on-the-hypocrites-at-apple-
       | who...
       | 
       | [4]: https://www.cnet.com/features/marvel-is-censoring-films-
       | for-...
        
         | splitstud wrote:
         | Unmatched manufacturing ecosystem? You have no idea what you
         | are talking about. Like zero.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | We've banned this account for repeatedly and egregiously
           | breaking the site guidelines. Seriously not cool.
           | 
           | If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email
           | hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll
           | follow the rules in the future. They're here:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
        
           | rg111 wrote:
           | Care to enlighten?
           | 
           | No, seriously.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Flamewar comments will get you banned here. If you'd please
             | review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and
             | stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
        
               | rg111 wrote:
               | That was a genuinely genuine question.
               | 
               | That was a serious question asked honestly.
               | 
               | I am not a troll.
               | 
               | Look at my past comment and post history.
        
         | jollybean wrote:
         | Surprisingly, there are a lot of strikes, labour issues, and
         | general unrest in China.
         | 
         | Instead of thinking about it like a 'Orwellian State' - think
         | of it more like an Orwellian State that could go 'off' at
         | anytime.
         | 
         | Note that citizens are concerned about their prosperity - as
         | long as growth is happening and money comes in - they are
         | content.
         | 
         | But they are also ultra nationalist and ultra ethnocentric to
         | the point where it's quite easy for the CCP or leadership to
         | simply blame 'Western Imperialism / Chauvinism' for any
         | perceived slight against China including legitimate concerns.
         | 
         | There will not be any protests in China about Hong Kong or
         | forced labour. It will be about corruption, property rights,
         | jobs etc..
        
           | einpoklum wrote:
           | > Surprisingly, there are a lot of strikes, labour issues,
           | and general unrest in China.
           | 
           | It only surprises people if they consider China as one of:
           | 
           | * A harmonious socialist utopia, or
           | 
           | * A totalitarian dystopia
           | 
           | unfortunately, the US government and mainstream news media
           | are trying to paint China as the latter of the two.
           | 
           | ----
           | 
           | Also, irrespective of the extent of nationalism in China,
           | western or US imperialism is a thing. Before the 20th century
           | it was literal empires with physical conquest, and these days
           | it is a combination of economic influence and military
           | interventions. Of course it also serves as a convenient
           | excuse and distraction...
        
             | jollybean wrote:
             | Imperialism is different than Nationalism and nobody is
             | exempt from it.
             | 
             | But China is like the West in the 1930s with the level of
             | direct control of communications and propaganda, not
             | allowing alternative narratives to form.
        
             | joshuajill wrote:
             | Yes the US had (has) a part in separatist movement in China
             | and it spelled disaster.
             | 
             | https://consortiumnews.com/2021/04/08/us-funded-uyghur-
             | activ...
        
               | pokepim wrote:
               | Wtf, so the Uyghur movement in the US is basically right
               | wing, pro gun, pro trump organization? Also seems to be
               | aligning with some qanon islamophobes as well. The irony.
        
           | kbelder wrote:
           | I have a sinking feeling that something horrible is going to
           | hit China in, say, the next two-three decades. Not sure
           | whether it'll be a cultural shift, economic collapse, but I
           | think the way they're structured once it starts to falter
           | it's going to explode in a really unpleasant way. Like
           | exceeding Mao-level deaths.
           | 
           | The West is messier, in a lot of ways, but I think they're
           | more fault-tolerant.
        
         | Proven wrote:
        
       | alkonaut wrote:
       | OK intel I know I'm probably representing less revenue than China
       | but I'm avoiding your products.
       | 
       | A _letter of apology_? To the Chinese regime?
       | 
       | Are there any companies who are giving the middle finger to the
       | regime and paying the price? Name them so we can support them.
        
       | stevespang wrote:
        
       | FooBarWidget wrote:
       | It's interesting to see that people on both sides are angry --
       | for different reasons. People on western Internet are angry at
       | Intel for having issued an apology. People on Chinese Internet
       | are angry because they view it as a non-apology, i.e. Intel still
       | goes ahead with the ban. I see people -- including Chinese
       | diaspora -- calling for banning Intel.
        
         | yorwba wrote:
         | Personally, I'm most angry that Intel refuses to properly audit
         | their suppliers. They're not actually banned from importing
         | goods from Xinjiang if they can prove that they weren't made
         | with forced labor.
         | 
         | If they could prove that, the US government should be happy
         | (because their stated goal of combating forced labor is
         | respected) and Chinese people should be happy, too (better
         | working conditions).
         | 
         | Merely restricting suppliers based on geography is a non-
         | solution, since it's not like forced labor magically stops if
         | you cross a provincial border.
        
           | splitstud wrote:
           | Why would I ever import from a supplier whose only positive
           | is price, if I have to go to extra effort and expense -
           | making them no longer competitive in any respect?
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | FooBarWidget wrote:
           | I don't think it's that simple. For example BCI performed
           | multiple audits since 2012 and hasn't found a single case of
           | forced labor.[1][2] Despite that, they've pulled back from
           | Xinjiang. Companies don't want to deal with Xinjiang just so
           | they can avoid controversies, regardless of actual facts.
           | 
           | Also, the Xinjiang Forced Labor Prevention Act is based on
           | the maxim of guilty-until-proven-innocent. There is no way to
           | conclusively prove a negative. Even if you perform 100
           | unannounced audits you can still say "oh there's 0.001%
           | chance that they fooled you 100 times"
           | 
           | 1 https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1375456747477815296 2
           | https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-03-26/BCI-s-China-office-
           | No-...
        
             | jedimind wrote:
             | Ah yes, those are truly reliable sources we can trust. Out
             | of everything you could have referenced, you decided to
             | cite a random propagandist on twitter and CGTN, why not
             | quote the CCP directly? This is surreal.
             | 
             | Edit: I just checked your twitter, you are a CCP apologist
             | par excellence, so you shamelessly referencing
             | propagandists is not as surreal as initially perceived,
             | just some casual undercover shilling.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | If you break the HN guidelines this badly again we will
               | ban you. They explicitly ask you not to post like this,
               | for deep, clear, and long-established reasons (which can
               | be summed up like this: well over 99.9% of internet
               | complaints about astroturfing and shillage are
               | demonstrably unfounded, and also full of poison that we
               | don't want here).
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
               | 
               | If you want further explanation, there's many years'
               | worth at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=al
               | l&type=comme... and you'll find other links there that go
               | deeply into the matter.
        
               | fartcannon wrote:
               | So 99.9% of the internet is manipulating the minds of
               | everyone on the internet. Some of those people come to HN
               | and post/upvote/downvote, and as a result of their lives
               | outside of HN, they regurgitate slightly filtered PR as
               | opinions or facts on HN.
               | 
               | I guess what I'm asking is, how do you guys deal with
               | second hand shilling and PR?
        
               | shrimp_emoji wrote:
               | >[FooBarWidget is] a CCP apologist par excellence, so you
               | shamelessly referencing propagandists is not as surreal
               | as initially perceived, just some casual undercover
               | shilling.
               | 
               | >well over 99.9% of internet complaints about
               | astroturfing and shillage are demonstrably unfounded, and
               | also full of poison that we don't want here).
               | 
               | This is firmly in the 0.1%. https://twitter.com/honglilai
        
               | FooBarWidget wrote:
               | Perhaps I need to remind you that astroturfing and
               | shilling mean being paid to say certain things. Why would
               | I accept such payments when I already have a well-paid
               | career? My HN profile is 14 years old, and you can see
               | that before 2020 I basically never posted anything about
               | China. Posting about China is just a hobby, man. I have a
               | day job as a software developer.
               | 
               | There is a reason why I post these things on my public
               | handle: to make the point that I'm not just a random bot.
               | Unlike some other people, who post anonymously out of
               | fear of being socially ostricized, and who have been
               | wrongly called "bots" or "shills" merely for having a
               | different opinion, I choose not to be afraid and not to
               | be silenced.
               | 
               | You should just accept that my opinions are my own, are
               | genuine, and are independently constructed without anyone
               | instructing me. And that merely having a different
               | opinion than the one you want to accept, doesn't make
               | that person a shill.
        
               | FooBarWidget wrote:
               | Right. Here, check this: https://apparelinsider.com/bci-
               | shanghai-claims-audit-finding...
               | 
               | Just because people and outlets have a different opinion
               | than you doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong, or
               | "propagandists". Some people just have a different
               | opinion, out of their own free will and independent
               | thought, all right?
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | hker wrote:
               | You are misrepresenting BCI by citing BCI Shanghai, which
               | is a red herring in this discussion, see my other comment
               | [1].
               | 
               | The problem with what you cite is not (only) with the
               | outlet (CGTN), but with the source (BCI Shanghai), and
               | also with using a red herring.
               | 
               | [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29666455
        
               | exo762 wrote:
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | FooBarWidget wrote:
               | Yes people can judge for themselves. Having said that, I
               | believe I also have some say in how I think I should be
               | judged, and that I am allowed to push back at others'
               | attempts to put me in a box.
               | 
               | I am not "pro-CCP". I only look that way because western
               | mainstream media is so full of anti-China propaganda that
               | anyone who deviates from mainstream opinion look like
               | pro-CCP.
               | 
               | (At this point, some will say "we are only against the
               | CCP, not the Chinese people, and you are wrongly equating
               | China with the CCP". I have written extensively in the
               | past why such rethoric doesn't stand to scuritiny and
               | merely covers up policies that will result in the real
               | suffering of common Chinese people:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29358557)
               | 
               | So no, I'm not a CCP supporter. What I am, is being tired
               | of all the anti-China propaganda that's on the one hand
               | merely biased and prejudiced misrepresentations, and on
               | the other hand a deliberate manufacturing of consent for
               | war. I am tired of my home being constantly
               | misrepresented and villified.
               | 
               | You are right that nobody knows my situation. So I will
               | hereby give you a sworn statement, i.e. you can hold me
               | accountable for it in a court of law if you find me to be
               | lying: my family is not held hostage by Chinese forces,
               | nobody from China is threatening me and my family, and
               | everything I say is entirely my own opinion based on my
               | own independent research without anybody paying me to say
               | these things.
        
               | mthoms wrote:
               | You may not be a paid shill (I'm certainly not accusing
               | you of it - that would be against the rules) but your
               | behaviour is indeed curious for someone who is trying to
               | not look like one. For instance, why are you trying to
               | get in touch with other HN'ers with a history of pro-
               | China commentary?
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29615344
               | 
               | Don't be surprised that people are suspicious. And it's
               | not because of a difference of opinion - users here are
               | very tolerant of that - it's because of repeated
               | behaviour (another example: avoiding answering difficult
               | questions regarding the alleged sexual assault of Peng
               | Shuai).
        
             | hker wrote:
             | You misrepresented BCI.
             | 
             | And there are other independent sources showing forced
             | labor in Xinjiang [1][2], regardless of what BCI Shanghai
             | said.
             | 
             | BCI Shanghai is contradicting the BCI headquarter [3], and
             | BCI Shanghai is not credible on this matter [4].
             | While there are plenty of authentic reports, and
             | investigations documented by independent research groups,
             | the BCI Shanghai's statement to deny the forced labor in
             | the region makes us just think how much pressure the
             | Chinese team of the group faces from the Chinese
             | government.
             | 
             | It is not that rare for a local Chinese branch to
             | contradict the global headquarter, possibly due to pressure
             | of operating in China.
             | 
             | For example, the local Hugo Boss in China wrote statements
             | on Weibo (supporting Xinjiang cotton) which contradicted
             | the global Hugo Boss headquarter (stating that Hugo Boss
             | does not use Xinjiang cotton) [5], and the headquarter
             | clarified that the Chinese Weibo statement was unauthorized
             | [6].
             | 
             | BCI Shanghai is in a similar situation: the local branch
             | operating in Shanghai (claiming to find no forced labor)
             | did not represent the headquarter [3].
             | 
             | The problem with what you cite is not (only) with the
             | outlet (CGTN), but with the source (BCI Shanghai).
             | 
             | You are like stating that Hugo Boss is supporting the
             | Xinjiang cotton, because you find a Weibo post by the local
             | office supporting it [5]. This is wrong [3][4][6].
             | 
             | And with other sources finding forced labor in Xinjiang
             | [1][2], the BCI Shanghai statement is a red herring in this
             | discussion.
             | 
             | [1]:
             | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/solar-
             | chin... "Solar industry's ties to China's Xinjiang region
             | raise specter of forced labor"
             | 
             | [2]: https://www.shu.ac.uk/helena-kennedy-centre-
             | international-ju... "In Broad Daylight: Uyghur Forced
             | Labour and Global Solar Supply Chains"
             | 
             | [3]: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/31275
             | 01/chi... "Chinese branch of Better Cotton Initiative
             | challenges headquarters and says it has found no evidence
             | of Xinjiang forced labour"
             | 
             | [4]: https://bitterwinter.org/better-cotton-initiative-why-
             | its-sh... "Better Cotton Initiative: Why Its Shanghai
             | Branch is Not Credible"
             | 
             | [5]: https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/26/hugo-boss-tells-
             | chinese-cu... "Hugo Boss tells Chinese customers it will
             | continue to purchase Xinjiang cotton, whilst own website
             | says it has never used it"
             | 
             | [6]: https://hongkongfp.com/2021/03/27/hugo-boss-statement-
             | saying... "Hugo Boss statement saying it will 'purchase and
             | support' Xinjiang cotton was 'unauthorised,' brand says"
             | 
             | Edited: added links [1][2][3].
        
               | hungryhobo wrote:
               | is bitterwinter.org a reliable source? or perhaps we
               | should dig deeper, is adrian zenz, whom most of the
               | xinjiang genocide claims originated from, a reliable
               | source?
               | 
               | https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-
               | chinese-...
        
               | hker wrote:
               | > is bitterwinter.org a reliable source?
               | 
               | The bitterwinter.org article, which is clearly labeled as
               | Op-Ed:
               | 
               | 1. reports that BCI Shanghai contradicts BCI headquarter
               | (which you can independently verify, as there are other
               | news sources supporting this, such as the SCMP article I
               | just added).
               | 
               | 2. argues that the local branch (BCI Shanghai) could be
               | under pressure for operating in China (the quoted text
               | above).
               | 
               | If you don't buy their reasoning (2 above), you can at
               | least agree with the HKFP reporting that the local Hugo
               | Boss Chinese branch contradicted the Hugo Boss global
               | headquarter without authorization, and make your
               | judgement call for why.
               | 
               | > or perhaps we should dig deeper...
               | 
               | You may want to read these sources [1][2], which I just
               | added to my original comment and do not rely on Adrian
               | Zenz.
               | 
               | > is adrian zenz, whom most of the xinjiang genocide
               | claims originated from, a reliable source?
               | 
               | With those other verifiable sources [1][2], we can ignore
               | the straw man question of whether Adrian Zenz is a
               | reliable source.
               | 
               | [1]:
               | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/solar-
               | chin... "Solar industry's ties to China's Xinjiang region
               | raise specter of forced labor"
               | 
               | [2]: https://www.shu.ac.uk/helena-kennedy-centre-
               | international-ju... "In Broad Daylight: Uyghur Forced
               | Labour and Global Solar Supply Chains"
        
               | dirtyid wrote:
               | Literally the first reference/citation of "Broad
               | Daylight" is attributed to Zenz. The Washington post does
               | no additional verification but attribute to "researchers"
               | who will no doubt also quote Zenz. It's also Washington
               | Post. There are no verifiable sources alleging coerced
               | labour that doesn't trace back to Zenz. Bitterwinter or
               | HKFP are also far from reliable, on par with Epochetimes
               | bias.
               | 
               | >Hugo Boss Chinese branch contradicted the Hugo Boss
               | global headquarter without authorization, and make your
               | judgement call for why.
               | 
               | Global HQs making judgement calls due to coordinated
               | pressure campaign from their primary markets, against the
               | due diligence of their local branch who has on the ground
               | experience. Make your judgement call for why.
        
           | chloerei wrote:
           | Skechers is a good example. They conducted multiple
           | inspections and found no forced labor, so they maintained
           | business dealings with Chinese suppliers.
           | 
           | https://about.skechers.com/wp-
           | content/uploads/2021/03/SKECHE...
        
         | hrrsn wrote:
         | > I see people -- including Chinese diaspora -- calling for
         | banning Intel.
         | 
         | Is this feasible? There's not all that many other options for
         | x86
        
           | T-A wrote:
           | https://www.tomshardware.com/news/dual-chinese-zen-cpu-
           | beat-...
        
           | Symbiote wrote:
           | I think AMD has less (possibly much less) in China than
           | Intel.
           | 
           | I spent about EUR200,000 on AMD servers last year. They are
           | performing better than Intel ones would have done at the same
           | price, so it was a very easy decision.
        
             | dnautics wrote:
             | isn't this exactly the opposite? IIRC there was a situation
             | where a large-ish? AMD subdivision in china was
             | nationalized and made off with a considerable amount of AMD
             | IP
        
               | formerly_proven wrote:
               | You're probably thinking about ARM, whose Chinese branch
               | unilaterally declared independency from the crown some
               | time ago.
        
               | colinmhayes wrote:
               | you're thinking of ARM
        
           | FooBarWidget wrote:
           | I doubt it. China is not there yet w.r.t. semiconductor
           | independence. There are people who say, buy AMD, but AMD is
           | _also_ subject to US laws...
           | 
           | So what will happen instead? From what I've seen so far,
           | China is careful with counterattacking US because they know
           | the US is stronger. I think the govt will just issue an angry
           | statement but do nothing concrete internationally, while
           | continuing their domestic efforts of semiconductor
           | development as they already have, and also continuing with
           | restructuring Xinjiang's economy (i.e. replacing foreign
           | customers with domestic customers, as happened with cotton)
        
             | e9 wrote:
             | Alibaba recently announced new CPU they developed based on
             | ARM: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/alibaba-
             | unveils-128-core-s...
        
             | limoce wrote:
             | They will choose AMD because AMD doesn't make this
             | statement clear but Intel explicitly mentions "Xinjiang" in
             | its annual supplier letter. I guess AMD did take this
             | factor into consideration.
        
         | AnimalMuppet wrote:
         | Personally, _I 'm_ angry at Intel for not having actual
         | convictions.
         | 
         | It looks like they're doing the ban, not because they actually
         | believe that there's slave labor in Xinjiang, but because their
         | stockholders will be mad if they don't. And they issued the
         | apology, not because they realized that there is no slave labor
         | in Xinjiang, but because they don't want China angry at them.
         | They're trying to just get on with being a business. (And to
         | some degree that's fair. Intel _is_ a business, not a moral
         | crusader. Still, I 'd like them to either take a stand, or
         | _not_ take a stand. Don 't try to "take a stand" just to make
         | people happy.)
         | 
         | ("Angry" is too strong a word. "Disappointed" might be better.
         | But I said "angry" to match the wording of the parent.)
        
           | alex77456 wrote:
           | There is no reason to expect human-like behaviour and traits
           | from organisations.
        
             | notpachet wrote:
             | And yet we deem it appropriate to grant them personhood in
             | the eyes of the law.
        
       | ScouterRich wrote:
       | Seeing this reminds me of a link I posted recently. This youtube
       | video features investigation into supposed concentration camps in
       | Xinjiang: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI8bJO-to8I I'm posting
       | it again because it seems like the kind of video that needs to be
       | seen.
        
       | lazyeye wrote:
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | > history of being woke?
         | 
         | Define this in a way we could pattern-match against their
         | behavior?
        
           | throwawaylinux wrote:
           | The word is pretty mainstream (at least in western countries)
           | now. Check Urban Dictionary.
           | 
           | https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woke
        
             | katbyte wrote:
             | your going to have to clarify, there is no consensus to be
             | found in your link:
             | 
             | * The act of being very pretentious about how much you care
             | about a social issue
             | 
             | * Deluded or fake awareness.
             | 
             | * When you look at the simplest thing and call it racist
             | because you want black people to be victims. Other
             | minorities don't matter. - a black conservative
             | 
             | * "Wokeness" occurs when a white, upper-class person
             | pretends to hold opinions they imagine a black lower-class
             | person might hold
             | 
             | * To be asleep and uncritically accept whatever nonsense
             | social science professors dream up to advance Marxist
             | goals. As with most liberal speak the meaning of the word
             | is the opposite of the word's standard meaning.
             | 
             | * "Being completely deranged, hysterical and seeing
             | racism/oppression in virtually everything."
             | 
             | * being aware of the social. and political environments
             | regarding all demographics and socio-economic standings.
        
               | throwawaylinux wrote:
               | You're wrong, there is a very strong consensus. The first
               | few entries are highly up voted. Take the first 2 as a
               | basic definition or idea of the concept and the 3rd one
               | as an example.
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | Even if you were correct -- and the Wikipedia page shows
               | the pejorative uses becoming common are a fairly recent
               | step of the euphemism treadmill -- that doesn't help
               | resolve @pjc50's request's the term be defined in a way
               | that allows someone to pattern match against Intel's
               | behaviour.
               | 
               | The comment @pjc50 replied to has been flagged, so I
               | can't be certain exactly what this is about, but the
               | article is literally about a company responding to legal
               | regulation which is itself ostensibly about a genocidal
               | concentration camp.
               | 
               | None of that is either (1) pretension, (2) deluded or
               | fake, (3), about specifically black people.
        
         | jollybean wrote:
         | Not buying products from forced labour concentration camps is
         | generally not an issue of 'wokeness'.
         | 
         | Hypocritical wokeness (in the pejorative sense) would be Nike
         | shifting from performance atheletes to SJ athletes like
         | Kaeernick, who sadly has made a direct comparison between the
         | NFL selection process and slave auction. And Nike of course
         | sources shoes in Asia from factories with very suspect labour
         | practices.
         | 
         | The US et. al. should absolutely ban anything coming from
         | districts where people are making stuff from concentration
         | camps.
         | 
         | If China were a small country, they'd never be able to get away
         | with it, it's not a huge story because everyone is afraid of
         | the consequences.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | > If China were a small country, they'd never be able to get
           | away with it, it's not a huge story because everyone is
           | afraid of the consequences.
           | 
           | In Libya, refugees are carted off to "prisons" not much above
           | concentration camps by the EU-financed "Libyan Cost Guard"
           | [1][2], slavery and other forms of human trafficking are
           | blooming across popular migration routes [3]. And no one
           | gives a fuck, despite all of this happening literally in
           | Europe's neighborhood.
           | 
           | Syria's Bashar al-Assad used barrel bombs [4] and chemical
           | weapons [5] against his own population, and "thanks" to
           | Russia protecting him, no one has (and likely, never will be)
           | been prosecuted for these crimes.
           | 
           | No matter if you are a small or a big country, the lesson
           | "never again" from the horrors of the NS dictatorship in
           | Germany seem to have been forgotten entirely.
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/12/06/the-
           | secretive-...
           | 
           | [2]: https://reliefweb.int/report/libya/complex-persecution-
           | repor...
           | 
           | [3]: https://time.com/longform/african-slave-trade/
           | 
           | [4]: https://reliefweb.int/report/syrian-arab-republic/nine-
           | years...
           | 
           | [5]: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Timeline-of-
           | Syrian-Ch...
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
        
       | DominikPeters wrote:
       | To me this sounds like a normal corporate non-apology. If I read
       | the article correctly, Intel's policy to not allow suppliers to
       | source from Xinjiang still stands, forced by Western regulation.
       | They are just apologizing that the policy caused offence. I would
       | prefer if Intel would outright condemn Chinese behavior in
       | Xinjiang, but this particular event doesn't outrage me much.
        
         | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
         | A corporate non-apology posted exclusively in the affected
         | country, no less. I don't know whether it's even right to say
         | that Intel the global company made the statement; the people
         | running their Weibo account are presumably in China and might
         | not have had an option.
        
       | hexo wrote:
       | So Intel saying "forced labour bad, mkay" is bad. After facing
       | ban saying 'is not how we feel about it". Really? Mhm, mkay. Not
       | sure what is worse now. Getting WW2 IBM vibes now kind of. This
       | is like calling for global boycott. Come on Intel, we know you
       | can do better
        
       | diebeforei485 wrote:
       | Actually doing the supply chain management work on the ground to
       | find individual suppliers using forced labor and getting them to
       | change their practices is too much for a small company like
       | Intel, I suppose.
        
       | Guessnotgauss wrote:
        
       | rob_c wrote:
       | If they were mining rare earths there I doubt this statement
       | would have made it past the "hey this sounds good and makes us
       | seem friendly" stage of marketing...
        
       | causi wrote:
       | _" We apologise for the trouble caused to our respected Nazi
       | customers, partners and the public. Intel is committed to
       | becoming a trusted technology partner and accelerating joint
       | development with the Third Reich,"_
       | 
       | Hell, working with genocidal governments didn't hurt IBM's bottom
       | line, why should Intel be afraid of it? We have zero history of
       | holding companies accountable for being spineless hypocrites.
        
         | joshuajill wrote:
         | Dude the US is supporting Nazis, literally. As well as
         | supporting Uygur separatists via right wing groups. So why
         | should Intel care right?
         | 
         | https://consortiumnews.com/2021/12/23/us-ukraine-refuse-to-c...
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Please do not take HN threads further into generic flamewar
           | hell. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it
           | is for.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please do not take HN threads further into generic flamewar
         | hell. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it
         | is for.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
       | sinoue wrote:
       | Sad to see Intel and others be so spineless.
        
         | jbotz wrote:
         | Corporations _are_ spineless, both literally and figuratively.
        
           | mariuz wrote:
           | Spineless corporations Reminds me of title of TV series about
           | Mafia : La piovra
           | 
           | "An epic crime saga of power, money, violence and corruption.
           | the mafia controls everything through local and international
           | networks like an octopus, anyone who tries to bring them down
           | pays the ultimate price."
           | 
           | https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086779
        
           | Symbiote wrote:
           | Unnecessary pedantry.
           | 
           | Read the comment as "sad to see the Intel executives and
           | others be so spineless".
        
             | alex77456 wrote:
             | It is not competitively advantageous to act in a 'spineful'
             | manner
        
             | sophacles wrote:
             | What do you think the "figuratively" part of the statement
             | means? I presumed it to mean exactly what you suggested. In
             | my mind anyway - a figuratively spineless corporation is a
             | corporations where executives and others are the spineless
             | ones.
             | 
             | Please enlighten me on what a figuratively spineless
             | corporation is, if it is not that.
        
       | perihelions wrote:
       | Apple lobbied the US government *against* the anti-concentration
       | camp labor bill that Intel is apologizing for in the OP,
       | 
       | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/20/apple-u... (
       | _" Apple is lobbying against a bill aimed at stopping forced
       | labor in China"_)
        
         | celeduc wrote:
         | Slave labor is _super_ profitable.
        
         | gentleman11 wrote:
         | This is why we need the pine phone and librem 5 so badly
        
       | dang wrote:
       | All: if you want to comment on HN on a divisive topic like this,
       | please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
       | and make sure you're commenting in the intended spirit: curious,
       | thoughtful, respectful conversation _across differences_. Note,
       | for example, this guideline--we really mean it:
       | 
       | " _Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less,
       | as a topic gets more divisive._ "
       | 
       | Many users can't seem to resist hurling flamebait and feeding
       | flamewars. Please don't be one of those. This is not a site for
       | smiting enemies or being an internet warrior, regardless of how
       | right your views are or you feel they are, and regardless of how
       | much badness there is to denounce. None of that is what we want
       | here, because it's repetitive, predictable, and self-reinforcing.
       | HN threads thrive on diffs, not repetition.
       | 
       | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
       | 
       | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
        
         | ribosometronome wrote:
         | There is a diff between not being a troll and being respectful
         | of alleged human rights abuses. Suggesting that we must be
         | respectful in the light of massive human rights violations is
         | how those human rights violations get to take place. This is
         | the same sort of peak Silicon Valley technocrat mindset that
         | led to things like apologizing for not sourcing parts from
         | forced labor in China and sites like reddit holding on to
         | jailbait, involuntary porn/voyeur, and literal hate subreddits
         | out of fear of taking any stance.
        
           | pokepim wrote:
           | So should we start criticizing every american company, person
           | and entity in every thread concerning anything american since
           | US government kills innocent civilians on an even bigger
           | scale than Chinese government? Because you know that is
           | exactly happening.
        
             | lowkey_ wrote:
             | If the US currently commits anything close to what's
             | happening in Xinjiang, particularly with the emphasis on it
             | being on a helpless minority of its own citizens, you would
             | have to link to it. Many of us don't think that is
             | happening.
        
               | pokepim wrote:
               | https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/WarDeath
               | Tol...
               | 
               | It's pure atrocity...
               | 
               | Also about the US minority ( I wasn't writing about that
               | in my earlier comment but since you brought that up)
               | 
               | https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01846-z
               | 
               | So stop denying that systemic racism, racial profiling of
               | minorities and targeted police brutality is not happening
               | in the US. Did you vote for Trump? Because that would
               | explain why you think those things don't exist.
        
               | ScouterRich wrote:
               | Nobody is saying that other countries haven't done
               | horrible things. That's a separate issue, unless your
               | argument is that it is okay for the CCP (not the Chinese
               | people, this is political, not racial) to commit crimes
               | against humanity. The response to the possible horrors in
               | Xinjiang, and Tibet, should not be countered with
               | whataboutisms. Don't we all want everyone to have a
               | quality life free of suffering and abuse by others?
        
               | Ostrogodsky wrote:
               | No the issue is that the Uighur situation has been
               | politicized in the west as a weapon to attack China.
               | Western governments have never cared about Muslim people
               | (on the contrary), same as for Chinese people, and you
               | want us to believe now that they care about a
               | Muslim,Chinese minority out of the good of their hearts.
               | This is in a world where atrocities against the Yemenis,
               | Palestinians, are under-reported if not outright ignored.
        
               | ScouterRich wrote:
               | Who is attacking China? The Communist Party thugs have
               | committed cultural and literal genocide since the 50s.
               | Your concerns about unreported atrocities, in Yemen,
               | Palestine, and other countries, is shared by many of the
               | same people who view what is going on in China as
               | particularly horrific, bringing to mind death camps in
               | nazi germany.
        
           | 3a2d29 wrote:
           | I think the intention is more to try an avoid every comment
           | just being "China bad, F*ck Intel"
           | 
           | We all know there are human rights abuses in China, but no
           | amount of emotional comments on an HN thread is gonna fix
           | that. It would be more productive to have some sort of more
           | thought provoking conversations.
           | 
           | And on the theme of discussion, isn't reddit very moderated?
           | I think 6% of all posts where removed last year
           | (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56099232)
        
           | dang wrote:
           | I'm saying you have to be respectful of this community and
           | its rules if you want to participate here. That's perfectly
           | reasonable: you're getting something, so it's fair for you to
           | give something in return. The HN guidelines explain clearly
           | what you need to give.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
           | 
           | Angry internet noun phrases like "peak Silicon Valley
           | technocrat mindset" are a distraction from this, not to
           | mention (god help us) porn/voyeur. All we're trying to do is
           | have an internet forum that doesn't suck. IMO that's a goal
           | that benefits everybody here, and everybody here should do
           | their part.
           | 
           | Users hurling nationalistic insults and ideological talking
           | points at each other obviously goes in exactly the wrong
           | direction for that. This shouldn't be hard to see. It also,
           | by the way, does nothing to help vulnerable human beings, and
           | invoking something noble like that to excuse garden-variety
           | internet mudslinging is a smidge distasteful.
        
             | killerdark wrote:
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | BobbyJo wrote:
           | The maximum effect a comment on here can have is making a
           | statement that changes someone's mind. Overly emotional,
           | shallow, or terse responses aren't going to have that effect.
           | 
           | I get your point, but disregard for decorum here isn't going
           | to solve any of those problems. At best it's shouting into a
           | void, at worst your fooling yourself into thinking you're
           | part of the solution while fixing nothing.
        
       | Borrible wrote:
       | The highest entry on that 'Read Next' frame on the right of that
       | website, for me is: 'Lick it up:...' that references to:
       | 
       | https://www.reuters.com/technology/lick-it-up-japan-professo...
       | 
       | Do I sense some traces of humor in that news feed algorithm?
        
       | 1cvmask wrote:
       | Should we demand that companies avoid California suppliers as
       | well because of the extensive use of prison labor:
       | 
       | https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-11/californ...
       | 
       | https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/policing/2020/11/11/c...
       | 
       | https://www.freedomunited.org/news/forced-prison-labor-in-ca...
        
         | albertopv wrote:
         | Yes. USA prison system is really awful, even more for a first
         | world country, richiest country in the world.
        
         | pjbeam wrote:
         | Definitely
        
         | vkou wrote:
         | It wouldn't hurt.
        
         | cletus wrote:
         | Prison labour is the unfortunate exception to the Thirteenth
         | Amendment that allowed effective slavery to continue. The whole
         | system is corrupt. It allows prisons to pay prisoners peanuts
         | (~25 cents/hour) and pocket the difference giving an economic
         | incentive to incarceration and an unfair competitive advantage
         | with people who can't choose not to work because doing so will
         | generally extend their sentence.
         | 
         | But you know the difference?
         | 
         | I can say that without it being taken down by the government or
         | some company acting on their behalf. I can say it without it
         | hurting my "social credit score". I can say it without being
         | "disappeared" and ending up in one of the sprawling "re-
         | education" camps in Xianjing that are so prevalent you can
         | track their massive growth on Google Maps.
         | 
         | There is clearly an organized effort to extinguish a people and
         | culture here, just like it has been and is in Tibet. Given the
         | history of this sort of thing, it's astounding to me how many
         | will defend, deflect or deny this.
         | 
         | Every time a valid criticism of the CCP comes up some shill
         | pops up and downvotes any criticism and/or leaves some "but
         | what about X" lame justification. It's actually depressing.
        
           | ncmncm wrote:
           | Chinese treatment of underclass people is evil. US treatment
           | of underclass people is evil. The statements are not in
           | conflict.
           | 
           | We have much less excuse for permitting our own evils,
           | because we could put a stop to ours if we cared.
        
         | ngc248 wrote:
         | Is it slave labour, I mean are they being forced to do it and
         | not being paid for it, then sure boycott it.
         | 
         | If NOT, and if it is an avenue for prisoners to earn money,
         | benefits, then don't boycott it
        
           | BrazzVuvuzela wrote:
           | > _I mean are they being forced to do it and not being paid
           | for it_
           | 
           | Slavery is forced labor, which is orthogonal to being paid.
           | If you are forced to work but are also paid (perhaps rare,
           | but not unheard of), you are still a slave regardless of the
           | pay. If you aren't being paid but aren't being forced to
           | work, you aren't a slave (that's called volunteering.)
        
           | olliej wrote:
           | The problem is that privately run prisons require prisoners
           | to pay for things that are realistically necessary despite
           | not being legally mandated. They overcharge more than
           | airports, and pay next to nothing.
           | 
           | They suffer because of it, and non-prisoners suffer as well,
           | as they're competing with what is functionally slave labour.
        
           | nichtich wrote:
           | Once you are already in prison it's hard to say whether you
           | are forced to do it or not. It's not like you have a lot of
           | employers and professions to choose from. And if the
           | incentives include things like easier to get parole then
           | refusing to participate would mean more time served. It'd be
           | pretty hard to prove some labor is not "forced" in a prison
           | setting.
        
             | Dylan16807 wrote:
             | > And if the incentives include things like easier to get
             | parole then refusing to participate would mean more time
             | served.
             | 
             | So what? That's just serving the original sentence. That
             | doesn't sound forced to me. Is it forced labor when someone
             | chooses to take a community service option instead of being
             | locked up?
        
               | breakfastduck wrote:
               | Yes of course it is. You're being forced to do it or end
               | up in prison. How is that not forced?
               | 
               | It's essentially a choice between 1 option at that point.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | You _earned_ the prison. Is it somehow better to remove
               | the option and just lock you up?
               | 
               | Negative prison time, applied to a legitimate sentence,
               | should never count as forcing.
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | You pretend to be unaware of false arrest, fabricated
               | evidence, bad representation, and over-sentencing of
               | underclass people.
               | 
               | US citizens are not uniquely criminal, but US
               | incarceration rate is by far highest in the world. You
               | don't get there justly.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | I don't pretend to be unaware of that. I think it's a
               | separate problem.
               | 
               | Like, okay, we say that anyone improperly imprisoned is
               | being forced into labor.
               | 
               | What about everyone else? The argument above was that it
               | clearly is forced labor, even when your sentence is
               | completely valid. I disagree with that.
               | 
               | > US citizens are not uniquely criminal, but US
               | incarceration rate is by far highest in the world. You
               | don't get there justly.
               | 
               | It's a mix of things. Even if you fixed all the bias in
               | the system, you could still have a high incarceration
               | rate with harsh but not inherently unjust laws.
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | Nobody has a legitimate reason to _want_ a high
               | incarceration rate.
               | 
               | The only reason to _have_ a higher incarceration rate
               | than any other country in the whole world is,
               | specifically, because you _want_ to have your underclass
               | ready to hand for slave labor. Or, generally, to repress
               | them.
               | 
               | If you are relying on threat of incarceration to
               | discourage criminal behavior, having the highest such
               | rate in the world is reliable evidence that your method
               | is failing to achieve that aim. Other countries are
               | demonstrating better methods you could learn from. If you
               | wanted to, that is.
        
               | jollybean wrote:
               | " because you want to have your underclass ready to hand
               | for slave labor. Or, generally, to repress them."
               | 
               | This is not unsubstantiated.
               | 
               | Moreover, it's upside down:
               | 
               | The economic labour output from US prisons is negligible
               | and has no material effect on the GPD or industrial
               | basis.
               | 
               | ... and those prisoners, were they outside of the prison
               | systems, in 'regular jobs' - would add tremendously more
               | to the GDP in terms of productivity.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | I never said anything about wanting a high incarceration
               | rate.
               | 
               | There can be other reasons for harsh laws. Don't be so
               | weirdly absolute. If a country does something wrong that
               | doesn't mean it necessarily has the one specific
               | motivation you're mad at and no other.
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | There are many motivations for evil action. They don't
               | contradict, they add. Having more does not make it less
               | evil.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | Yep.
               | 
               | Also this has nothing to do with the point I was trying
               | to make, which wasn't about the US specifically.
               | 
               | To restate it, just to be very clear: 1. find someone
               | that was legitimately sentenced to a fair duration of
               | prison 2. offering them the ability to labor to reduce
               | their sentence is not forced labor
        
               | jollybean wrote:
               | "US citizens are not uniquely criminal"
               | 
               | US citizens are _absolutely_ uniquely criminal.
               | 
               | The violent gun murder rate in the US is 5x what it is
               | European countries. Those are stats based on deaths, not
               | criminal prosecutions.
               | 
               | The number of 'high speed chases' etc. is considerably
               | higher.
               | 
               | In some 'high crime / poverty' areas of the US, the
               | amount of crime again is multiples of those of other
               | nations.
               | 
               | Moreover, the US has the right to put people in prison
               | for crimes in a different manner than say Sweden, who
               | might only have someone in jail for 4 years for murder.
               | 
               | China is putting Uyghurs in jail for their ethnicity, not
               | for any crimes committed, so the issue is moot.
        
         | olliej wrote:
         | yes?
         | 
         | Prison labour is fundamentally slave labour, especially in the
         | US. The US prison system expanded massively after slavery was
         | made illegal, especially privately run for profit businesses
         | that are allowed to sell prisoners as laborers for below real
         | market rates.
        
         | mike_d wrote:
         | In the United States prisoners are required to participate in
         | "work duties," which are defined as essential functions of the
         | prison. For example you can be made to wash laundry because you
         | are using bed sheets and clothing.
         | 
         | You cannot be forced into doing external work where the benefit
         | of your labor falls to a private entity. Of course you can
         | choose to do so and the primary benefit is not the wages (which
         | are unfairly low in my opinion) but the "day for day" that
         | reduces your sentence.
        
           | ncmncm wrote:
           | That is just so far from true it is hard to understand why
           | you believe it.
           | 
           | There are states that have such rules, and others
           | (particularly in the South) that explicitly do not enforce
           | any such rule. Often a rule exists but is meaningless; if
           | they want to be able to have visitors, or to get outside to
           | exercise, they are obliged to engage with outside labor.
        
           | simonh wrote:
           | The wages are paltry yes, but as I understand it US prisons
           | charge absurdly high rates for basic services such as phone
           | calls and even individual emails, so there's a very coercive
           | incentive on prisoners to work anyway.
        
         | Taniwha wrote:
         | Well the US constitution explicitly allows slavery in this
         | particular case, why not?
        
         | jollybean wrote:
         | China has a Justice System, and most people are in prison for
         | crimes.
         | 
         | China does not have a Justice System - it's entirely
         | politicized (people are put to death in private trials with
         | fabricated evidence), but even then, we are not banning stuff
         | 'because Chinese prison'.
         | 
         | We are banning specifically from concentration camps where
         | 100's of thousands of Uyghurs are imprisoned not for any crime,
         | but merely because of their ethnicity.
         | 
         | So if Cali started taking Japanese citizens property, throwing
         | them in jail, and forcing them to work and to 'retrain their
         | thinking' i.e. even worse than what happened to some in WW2,
         | then we could start to talk about moral equivalence.
        
           | samus wrote:
           | I think the first paragraph should be fixed. Slightly
           | contradicts the rest of the comment, no? ;-)
        
             | jollybean wrote:
             | Sorry, meant to say 'Modern Nations' have Justice Systems.
        
         | christkv wrote:
         | yes
        
         | Loic wrote:
         | Definitely! Human rights are the same for all humans.
        
           | aetherspawn wrote:
           | But not for criminals in prison (think about it).
        
           | jollybean wrote:
           | You do not have a 'human right' to commit crimes, which is
           | why you go to jail in nations that have a legit Justice
           | System.
           | 
           | The concentration camps in China are not for people who have
           | committed crimes, they're for people who are of a specific
           | ethnicity, that's it.
        
             | Loic wrote:
             | My comment refers to the specific abuse with forced slave
             | work conditions for the jailed population in California.
             | Nothing more.
        
             | dennis_system wrote:
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | JohnHaugeland wrote:
       | I wish they wouldn't apologize. This was the right choice.
        
       | viktorcode wrote:
       | What is sad to see is how many Chinese are supporting genocide.
        
         | bscphil wrote:
         | I disagree. They genuinely don't believe it is genocide.
         | There's even international disagreement about the proper
         | characterization of it. Most countries sufficiently
         | propagandize their own citizens to inoculate them against the
         | view that their own actions represent crimes against humanity,
         | regardless of how they come to be viewed decades or centuries
         | later.
         | 
         | I don't think the core of your idea is wrong though. The
         | disturbing thing, to me, is that pro-China writers both in this
         | thread and elsewhere think that disproving the charge of
         | genocide (by linking to blogs or China's own view on the
         | subject, mostly) they have cleared China of wrongdoing. It's
         | obvious to me as someone with a modicum of moral intelligence
         | that this is not really the case.
         | 
         | As an American, I am happy to admit that my understanding of
         | the situation in Xinjiang is probably tainted by anti-China
         | ideas being spread in my country. _However_ , even if I take
         | China entirely at its word about what it is doing, it's still
         | quite obvious that this is _horrifically_ bad and wrong. I
         | would support boycotts entirely on the basis of China 's _own_
         | characterization of its actions.
         | 
         | That's really the sad, disturbing thing; people are supporting
         | China by "showing" that Western media characterizations of the
         | camps are inaccurate. I'm happy to admit they might be, but I
         | believe it is a great moral failing to not denounce China's
         | actions on its own terms.
         | 
         | What is uncontested: China is sending members (~1.3M per year)
         | of a religious / ethnic minority (Uyghur) to internment camps
         | for the purpose of preventing / deterring terrorism and to
         | promote their social integration into China as a whole.
         | 
         | This is _chilling_ to anyone who knows anything at all about
         | the history of interning ethnic minorities. It was bad and
         | wrong when the United States sent 125,000 Japanese people to
         | live in camps during World War II. Anyone who protested or
         | boycotted the United States for the purpose of ending that
         | internment was, or would have been, justified. I am fully ready
         | to apply the same standards to other countries, including my
         | own, as I apply to China.
         | 
         | Likewise, whether it fully qualifies for the term "forced
         | labor" or not, work done by people while imprisoned is
         | _inherently_ questionable and deserves heavy scrutiny. I
         | believe that the conditions in prisons in the United States and
         | the very-low-wage labor done by our prisoners are an abject
         | moral horror, and it 's important to turn the same critical eye
         | to China's use of Uyghur labor.
         | 
         | Again, that's just looking at China's own view of it. The facts
         | of the matter are likely to lie somewhere in between, which is
         | even more concerning. It's hard not to see the shadow of some
         | of the 20th century's fascistic horrors in China's
         | discriminatory policies towards the Uyghur population,
         | especially if anything in this piece turns out to be true:
         | https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-international-news-we...
        
           | ncmncm wrote:
           | The US incarcerates many, many more than China, as a much
           | higher fraction of its population. Probably at least as many
           | are on no better pretext, and are similarly exploited for
           | prison labor.
           | 
           | Thus, a boycott-US movement would be (also!) justified, but
           | better would be to check on practices and boycott specific
           | companies that do not take particular care not to rely on
           | prison labor in any country. That is more work, but
           | supporting liberty everywhere is always going to be very hard
           | work. However much, it is worth doing.
           | 
           | I type this posting on a phone. We are all almost as
           | complicit as we can be.
        
             | whodunnit wrote:
             | Does the U.S. incarcerate people based on their religion?
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | Does it matter? A pretext is a pretext.
               | 
               | In fact, there have been a great many Americans
               | railroaded into prison for, essentially, being Muslim,
               | for refusing to try to entice other Muslims to engage in
               | attempts at domestic terrorism so that they can be
               | imprisoned, just to burnish somebody's resume.
               | 
               | But mostly black people are railroaded into prison for
               | being black. Do you imagine that is less bad?
        
               | jollybean wrote:
               | "A pretext is a pretext."
               | 
               | ????
               | 
               | No.
               | 
               | A 'crime' is a legitimate pretext for putting someone in
               | jail.
               | 
               | Being of a certain ethnicity is _not_ a reason for
               | putting someone in jail.
               | 
               | I can't believe I am reading this.
               | 
               | And your statements about 'putting Muslims in jail for
               | being Muslim' and But mostly 'black people are railroaded
               | into prison for being black' are completely false. People
               | are put in jail for crimes, whereupon the justice system
               | in some cases may not be fully equally applied and FYI if
               | anything the Justice System is heavy in the US to the
               | point whereupon supposedly privileged group face nearly
               | equally excessive oversight from the system - which is
               | altogether a different problem.
        
         | celeduc wrote:
         | Genocidal policies are usually quite popular with the local
         | majority.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please don't post generic flamewar comments to HN, and
         | certainly not generic nationalistic flamewar comments. It's
         | against the site guidelines and everything we're trying for
         | this forum to be.
         | 
         | No, I'm not defending genocide. I'm just trying to defend this
         | forum from burning itself to a crisp. There are lots of other
         | places on the internet to hurl platitudes at enemies.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
         | kwere wrote:
         | sinocentrism is the belief in wich han culture is seen as
         | superior and others need to assimilite or "go away". its a
         | thousand old practice. most people seem compliacent with this
         | view supported by the government. 92% of china is han and 56
         | minorities take the other 8%.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinocentrism
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_nationalism
        
           | g8oz wrote:
           | There has been pushback against Han supremacy in the past,
           | sad to see those efforts have been forgotten in today's
           | China.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Races_Under_One_Union
        
         | ZoomerCretin wrote:
        
           | snovv_crash wrote:
           | Forced sterilization of an ethnicity is genocide, and there's
           | no debate as to whether this is happening.
        
             | dennis_system wrote:
        
             | ZoomerCretin wrote:
             | China has a population control policy. They've exempted
             | minorities from this policy for decades. That they are now
             | enforcing their laws equally is not genocide.
        
       | AIorNot wrote:
       | Sad to see this - injustice and oppression must be fought against
       | regardless of economic consequence
       | 
       | https://www.polygraph.info/a/fact-check-forced-labor-uyghurs...
        
       | mrweasel wrote:
       | I really don't understand China, but China also don't care to
       | understand the west one bit. China has zero cultural understand
       | about anything beyond its borders and basically only survives on
       | other cultures being either extremely flexible or completely
       | dependent on China for manufacturing (or both).
       | 
       | We're basically just waiting for companies to pull manufacturing
       | from China, because they can deal with the backlash at home for
       | ever, or some western leader to snap and just tell China to "Go
       | kill whoever you need to get rid of so we can move on".
        
         | temp8964 wrote:
         | It's really not about "China". It's all about CCP.
         | 
         | It's also not the CCP doesn't care. The CCP does care about its
         | international image. But it's making choice between domestic
         | control and international image. It's obvious to CCP right now
         | that the world is heavily rely on China's market and
         | manufacturing power. So the CCP can use it to suppress any
         | backlash, and do terrible things domestically. The whole HK
         | affair has firmly proved that the western world can't do
         | anything to it. Invading Taiwan is definitely in its
         | calculation.
        
         | Shadonototra wrote:
         | > and basically only survives on other cultures being either
         | extremely flexible or completely dependent on China for
         | manufacturing (or both).
         | 
         | yeah, china only exist since 1940, it's a known fact ;)
         | 
         | > We're basically just waiting for companies to pull
         | manufacturing from China, because they can deal with the
         | backlash at home for ever, or some western leader to snap and
         | just tell China to "Go kill whoever you need to get rid of so
         | we can move on".
         | 
         | the west is just waiting to make more profit from its own
         | people, if that means building their factory in china and
         | destroying jobs, families and lives, they'll do it
         | 
         | in the meantime China is already on the far side of the moon
         | and is about to land on the moon with its bases
         | 
         | --
         | 
         | if we want to improve our society, we must stop being blind and
         | repeat what ever propaganda we hear in the west about China
         | 
         | China is doing exactly what we are doing, if you mad at china,
         | be mad at yourself for building this society
         | 
         | China eradicated extreme poverty in its country, what the west
         | did to its people? the US still doesn't have universal
         | healthcare
         | 
         | between the 2 model of society, China's is looking more human
         | and is willing to advance humankind more
         | 
         | i'd rather empower China than what ever the English block is
         | trying to do ;)
        
           | splitstud wrote:
           | Supply chains are already moving from China as fast as
           | possible. Access to western markets will disappear. No amount
           | of rhetoric will change this.
        
         | lvl100 wrote:
         | US fed the beast that is CCP and now the beast can't be
         | controlled. Do you fault the beast or the idiot who
         | miscalculated and kept feeding the beast?
        
           | ceejayoz wrote:
           | You blame both, since they're both sets of sentients capable
           | of reason, not cats mesmerized by a laser pointer.
        
           | wolverine876 wrote:
           | The US has never supported the CCP. The US supported trade
           | with China the country and with the people of China, and also
           | their freedom and rights. The trade also benefitted the CCP.
           | 
           | It's long been believed, and many times it's happened, that
           | as countries grow middle classes they become democratic and
           | free (Taiwan, South Korea, etc.). So far the CCP has
           | forstalled that, but despite the trend in disparaging
           | democracy (also in democracies, bizarrely), there's a long
           | history showing that it wasn't a crazy idea and, despite
           | recent setbacks, hardly impossible.
        
           | Layke1123 wrote:
        
         | api wrote:
         | China is in the same position as Saudi Arabia. They have
         | something the rest of the world needs so they can do anything
         | they want.
         | 
         | For China it's cheap skilled labor. For Saudi it's oil, gas,
         | and loads of cash.
        
         | wyuenho wrote:
         | It's not about culture. China has been interacting with the
         | rest of the world for millennia. It's about mindset. It's about
         | them not willing to let go of their chauvinistic imperial
         | outlook they impart on themselves and to the world.
        
           | throw44532323 wrote:
        
             | Quarrelsome wrote:
             | today, not the 19th century.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Nationalistic flamewar is not allowed on HN and posting this
           | sort of nationalistic denunciation is not ok, regardless of
           | which country you have a problem with.
           | 
           | If you wouldn't mind reviewing
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking
           | the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be
           | grateful.
        
             | jerry_cto wrote:
        
         | pjmlp wrote:
         | We can start by not buying anything Made In China as much as
         | possible, however I fail to ever see that happening, as most
         | are quick to forget their morals when it hits their wallets.
        
           | blizdiddy wrote:
           | Yep, who needs foreign policy when we can buy different
           | sneakers? Clearly shaming consumer habits will scale better.
           | If we just all act without self-interest, there is really no
           | problem!
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Start by being the change don't wait for it to happen.
        
           | eitland wrote:
           | > as most are quick to forget their morals when it hits their
           | wallets.
           | 
           | I realized the other day that if I saw a tray of "Made in
           | China" utensils and a comparable tray of "Made in
           | Africa/Europe/USA" utensils of roughly the same quality I'd
           | happily pay a dollar or two extra, no questions asked for the
           | ones that doesn't originate in China these days.
           | 
           | I ended up not buying it at all since there was no
           | alternative that was not made in China and I really wasn't in
           | the mood for buying anything Chinese after their recent
           | bullying of Lithuania.
           | 
           | I am in the mood for buying something from Lithuania though,
           | almost to the point of ordering a bag of fresh Lithuanian air
           | for about $10 or $20 bucks just for the point of it if
           | someone offers it.
        
             | kgran wrote:
             | It seems that pure Lithuanian air cans are all sold out. As
             | an alternative, you can buy Lithuanian cow dung in a can
             | here: https://dovanusalis.lt/lietuviskas-karvutes-sudas-
             | skardineje I couldn't see an English translation of the
             | website, so you have to translate things or guess a little
             | to navigate there.
        
               | eitland wrote:
               | I guess customs aren't too happy to allow cow dung across
               | the borders, but otherwise this is brilliant: at the
               | moment I want to buy Lithuanian cow dung more than buying
               | anything from China :-)
        
             | tadasv wrote:
             | Buy https://stores.balticvalue.com/products/electric-
             | potato-grat...
             | 
             | They ship it straight from lithuania. I got one recently
             | myself. Made it Lithuania also.
             | 
             | Then use this device to make Kugelis.
        
           | earthscienceman wrote:
        
           | zelon88 wrote:
           | That's not going to do anything.
           | 
           | In modern day, American companies have more to gain in China
           | than they have to lose in the USA. The market they are
           | chasing is 3 times larger than the US and the only
           | "regulation" in sight is basically bribing local government.
           | 
           | Don't be surprised if the companies you boycott simply move
           | operations to China and cut ties with the US.
           | 
           | China devalues its domestic currency on purpose so that
           | oligarchs use the stronger American dollar as a vehicle. Once
           | the companies move to China they can strengthen their
           | domestic currency, shed the dollar, and then Americans will
           | be making Ipads in factories with suicide nets and China will
           | be sipping Starbucks wearing inexpensive "Made in USA" Apple
           | watches
        
             | foepys wrote:
             | This is completely ignoring the fact that China doesn't
             | want foreign companies operating inside their borders
             | unless they form a joint venture with a local Chinese owned
             | company that owns >50%.
             | 
             | China is also an authoritarian regime that does not care
             | about laws if a company doesn't play ball. They will just
             | be shut down. This doesn't sound like a good market to put
             | all your trust into.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | TearsInTheRain wrote:
             | 3x larger in people is not 3x larger in wealth. I think US
             | and China are comparable in that regard. And I dont know if
             | the opportunity going forward is so incredible given
             | China's debt levels and impending population bust.
        
               | zelon88 wrote:
               | You don't understand.
               | 
               | China is in debt because the government wants to be in
               | debt. They have to be to have population control. If
               | there were no debt their population would have already
               | busted.
               | 
               | The oligarchs who rule China don't use Chinese currency.
               | So they are not impacted by debt levels. China also
               | doesn't promote their currency internationally as a means
               | of keeping domestic purchasing power low.
               | 
               | If you threaten China they will reverse these decisions
               | and actually try to compete for quality of life. That's
               | where western civilization as we know it ends. That's
               | where the American empire falls and the Chinese empire
               | rises.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _If you threaten China they will reverse these
               | decisions and actually try to compete for quality of
               | life_
               | 
               | This would require political revolution. The system is
               | set up and dependent on a complex net of patronage among
               | the elites. Competing for quality of life would mean
               | taking their chips. People don't like it when you take
               | their chips.
               | 
               | This _might_ have been possible to do peacefully before
               | Xi. But he 's shown the cost of the competition is high.
               | If you come in second place, you don't get another shot
               | in five or ten years. You lose the chance of a lifetime,
               | and will likely see yourself and your family persecuted
               | by the state.
        
           | smhenderson wrote:
           | It's also become increasingly difficult, and in some cases
           | nigh impossible, to avoid items from China.
           | 
           | I'm older and don't need a lot beyond the food and shelter I
           | work for, I have plenty of "stuff".
           | 
           | But buying clothing, gifts, electronics, well, the list is
           | long and I won't try to cover everything here, that doesn't
           | have at least part of it's assembly provided by China is not
           | easy to avoid. It's not just people's wallets, it's time,
           | it's lack of knowledge and one's ability to figure out how to
           | get what they need without involving China in the
           | acquisition.
           | 
           | I agree with you, but let's not pretend that we don't stop
           | "buying from China" because we're all too lazy and greedy to
           | do so. We could use some legislative and corporate support
           | and I think a lot more people would get on board.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Hence why I took care to hint as much as possible,
             | definitely there are goods impossible to get elsewhere,
             | others are relatively easy to find if one cares enough.
        
             | dnautics wrote:
             | > It's also become increasingly difficult, and in some
             | cases nigh impossible, to avoid items from China.
             | 
             | I have the opposite experience. I find it's becoming
             | increasingly easy. I'm finding myself surprised that most
             | things aren't made in china. So far the only thing I
             | haven't been able to get was a waffle maker -- I can do
             | without! Or I should just actually get a $300 waffle maker
             | instead of something stupid that will probably break after
             | a few runs
             | 
             | The hardest to find was a power drill.
             | 
             | I suspect that much of this is labor costs in china going
             | up and manufacturing moving to India, Pakistan, Thailand,
             | vietnam
             | 
             | Also -- I don't buy much from Amazon anymore, so this is
             | going to b&m establishments
        
               | spaetzleesser wrote:
               | "Or I should just actually get a $300 waffle maker
               | instead of something stupid that will probably break
               | after a few runs"
               | 
               | I did this for a while but a lot of US manufacturers seem
               | to like producing low quality items for a high price
               | under the label "Made in USA".
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | "Made in USA" is often code for "made with prison labor".
               | Louisiana is said to make a point of incarcerating
               | particularly black citizens on made-up charges and
               | excessive sentencing to maintain a ready prison labor
               | pool.
               | 
               | So, it is probably important to verify that such products
               | are not from prison labor.
               | 
               | China has is rightly criticized for unjustified
               | incarceration, particularly in Xinjiang, but the US
               | incarcerates many more on largely similar pretexts, which
               | amounts to a much larger fraction of its population.
               | Reducing US incarceration rate is a moral imperative.
        
               | TakuYam wrote:
               | That's an incredibly serious claim to make, do you have
               | evidence to support your claims?
        
               | xxpor wrote:
               | It's not particularly controversial. Here's the NY
               | version, for example. https://corcraft.ny.gov/
               | 
               | There's an explicit carve out in the 13th amendment's
               | slavery prohibition for people convicted of crimes.
        
               | selectodude wrote:
               | They make signs and license plates for the state. As far
               | as prison labor goes, that seems relatively benign.
        
               | ncmncm wrote:
               | They do a very great deal more than that. Places with
               | strong unions restrict what they do just so they don't
               | compete with union labor. But that leaves enormous
               | leeway, which is reliably exploited.
               | 
               | Many private prisons have contracts with states
               | guaranteeing them a quota of prisoners, on pain of
               | monetary penalties. It becomes the job of police and
               | courts to deliver that quota, regardless of behavior,
               | because there is no money budgeted for penalties.
               | 
               | Everybody can be found guilty of something, if you want
               | to.
        
               | shkkmo wrote:
               | Even if something doesn't say "Made in China", the
               | chances are that many or most of it's components were
               | made in China.
               | 
               | You have a bit better chances if you instead whitelist
               | countries with stricter rules of origin (for example,
               | Made in USA requires 50% of the components to be made
               | here) but even then much of the supply chain for that
               | item will probably trace back to China.
        
               | dnautics wrote:
               | > but even then much of the supply chain for that item
               | will probably trace back to China.
               | 
               | You're still doing one stage better; but also you'd be
               | surprised how much of that supply chain _doesn 't_ come
               | from china, especially now, with supply chain issues and
               | manufacturers using it as opportunity to re-tool their
               | sourcing.
        
               | Fnoord wrote:
               | Fairphone have an analysis on their complete supply
               | chain, of every component. Lots come from China, but more
               | interesting: components of components have a source too,
               | raw materials too, as does travel.
               | 
               | An example of the latter, Fairphone used trains to move
               | the assembled smartphones to EU. Those trains moved from
               | China through Russia, dven during and after Crimea
               | conflict and MH17 disaster.
               | 
               | Its a shame I don't have a link handy to their supply
               | chain infographic. It is so detailed, includes all
               | corporations and locations, that it would warrant a HN
               | submission within its own. OTOH, they yet have to make it
               | for their recent product, FP4.
        
               | silisili wrote:
               | > The hardest to find was a power drill.
               | 
               | Depending on where you live and what you like....DeWalt
               | and high end Craftsman make drills in the USA. Makita
               | makes some in Japan. I believe Bosch does some in
               | Germany, but don't quote me on that.
        
               | dnautics wrote:
               | DeWalt, Craftsman and Makita all had "made in china".
               | Bosch was not (I think it's thailand). Maybe i was too
               | low-end.
        
               | chang1 wrote:
               | I picked up USA made waffle iron from C. Palmer
               | Manufacturing. It's super basic and almost 2-3x more
               | expensive than the first few results on Amazon, but it's
               | great! (https://cpalmermfg.com/waffle-irons.html) Hope
               | that helps with your waffle making.
        
               | kbelder wrote:
               | It's two days before Christmas! Why couldn't I have seen
               | that link three weeks ago?
        
               | dnautics wrote:
               | perfect! But I will be making chaffles =D
        
               | MisterTea wrote:
               | At first I suspected made in USA could mean assembled in
               | USA from Chinese castings and other parts. But man is it
               | so freaking satisfying to see at the top of the page next
               | to "About us" is a link to their tool and die shop.
               | They're a freaking casting shop that decided to make
               | waffle makers. Fantastic.
        
               | Tsarbomb wrote:
               | Super basic? What more do you need!? It makes waffles!
               | 
               | Also I just saw that they actually sell the individual
               | parts should you need to replace something. This company
               | seems like a real gem.
        
             | mrweasel wrote:
             | Clothing isn't to bad, most is made in other countries, who
             | are terrible in their own way.
             | 
             | For stuff like electronics is impossible, it's almost all
             | made in China. The only solution I see it keeping stuff for
             | longer or buying used.
        
               | cheaprentalyeti wrote:
               | For electronics in general and CPUs in particular, "Made
               | in China" is becoming the Clipper Chip for the
               | 2010's/2020's. So yeah, this thing with intel is very
               | disturbing. They're paying for the rope that'll be used
               | to hang all of us with this.
        
               | ekianjo wrote:
               | Not all made per se, but assembled in China at least.
               | china is not yet a powerhouse when it comes to
               | manufacture top of the line SoCs for example.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | On a positive note, most modern electronics have a bunch
               | of "bent metal", screws, and memory + microprocessors.
               | The first two are very low value and frequently produced
               | directly in China. The last two are high value and most
               | frequently produced in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the
               | United States, and various parts of Europe. When you look
               | at the "value added" by assembly of an iPhone in China,
               | it is astonishingly low. The vast majority of value (for
               | hardware) is added outside of China.
        
               | davidzweig wrote:
               | Chinese companies also make low-middle-end
               | microcontrollers (gigadevice etc.), passive components,
               | switches and connectors (clones of Japanese designs
               | mostly) that are much lower cost and 'ok'. There's also
               | PCB manufacturing and stuffing, tooling, injection
               | molding (using Chinese or German machines), final
               | assembly. For things like Bluetooth speakers, it's all
               | local.. a wifi router might me be all local appart from
               | the SOC.. iPhones yeah different story.
        
             | joveian wrote:
             | I agree that legislative and corporate support would be
             | helpful, however in my experience the only pretending is
             | that more than a small number of people care. Look at your
             | own post - on the one hand, you would be financially
             | supporting genocide, on the other hand you want to buy
             | gifts. That this is even a question is sign of where things
             | really stand and I think you are putting more effort into
             | it than most people. See also how many people aren't
             | willing to take minor precautions to avoid killing their
             | own family members.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendigo
        
             | syshum wrote:
             | It is hard if you want to say "Buy American" or something
             | like that
             | 
             | But I find it easy to avoid chinese products, for example I
             | just recently was in the market for some cookware, I
             | thought my choices were expensive American made pans, or
             | cheap China, but in reality I found some very good cookware
             | coming out of South America for very good price
        
             | sysOpOpPERAND wrote:
             | there is an app where you can scan beauty products and it
             | will tell you what is in them, it gives you warnings about
             | dangerous chemicals in certain products. it's called think
             | dirty. there is another app for food that does the same
             | thing called yuka.
             | 
             | i wonder if there is an app where it will tell you the
             | origin of a product or a rating on the company based on
             | ethics. like ethically sourced rating or something along
             | those lines.
        
           | rob_c wrote:
           | I wouldn't say people forget as a lot of people don't have
           | the extra capital to shop for soy vegan lates every morning
           | for breakfast. These decisions are firmly in the realm of the
           | political economics.
           | 
           | Either cut off the product supply through embargoes or taxes
           | or build a competing supply chain...
        
           | alexfromapex wrote:
           | This is mostly the fault of big box retail stores sourcing
           | most of their merchandise in China. It will take consumers
           | totally boycotting Chinese merchandise in order for them to
           | stop ordering more stuff from China.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Which is why consumers that care need to change their
             | habits.
             | 
             | This doesn't apply only to China sourced goods.
        
         | tomtung wrote:
         | > China also don't care to understand the west one bit. China
         | has zero cultural understand about anything beyond its borders
         | 
         | Well, consider how many people in China have learned English,
         | can read articles / online discussions in English, or have
         | traveled to the west. Contrast that to the number of westerners
         | who can read Chinese or have been to China.
         | 
         | China surely understands the west a lot better than the other
         | way around. It just disagrees and has its own interests to look
         | after.
        
         | bhouston wrote:
         | > "Go kill whoever you need to get rid of so we can move on."
         | 
         | Israel appears to be one of the Western nations where they are
         | deepening ties and not bowing to US pressure to disengage:
         | 
         | * http://www.news.cn/english/2021-11/17/c_1310316894.htm
         | 
         | * https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/16/us-israel-china-deals/
         | 
         | * https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-not-expected-
         | to-j...
        
         | mpol wrote:
         | If you allow me to throw in an idea, and please correct me if
         | you see fit.
         | 
         | In earlier times the Confucian pacifist ways of China were not
         | up to the aggression of Western Europe, the US and Japan. In
         | more recent times they learned to deal better with these
         | foreign powers. The last thing they want is to give up their
         | autonomy and culture and get run over by all these well meaning
         | politicians that are very much after power anyway.
         | 
         | The moslim communities might be seen as a threat to Chinese
         | conformity since they often hold very tight their moslim
         | culture. The same thing might be happening around Falun Dafa. I
         | don't really know how it started, but where we are now, they
         | might be seen as a threat as well, since they are now quite
         | aggressive in their wordings towards the Chinese government.
        
           | sharklazer wrote:
           | So, it's fine to just genocide, I suppose. The Han are
           | superior to all anyway. They should have the right to
           | genocide "moslims" and any non-Han they feel like right?
           | 
           | No.
           | 
           | Your defense is farcical. Just because a group of people have
           | a different culture in a different land, does not make it
           | alright to go and conquer them for their land and resources
           | and enslave them.
           | 
           | This starts with that grandiosely-psychpathic imbecile named
           | Mao. To him, it seemed wise to call 100+ people groups "Han"
           | and united them by force.
           | 
           | "Political power comes from the barrel of a gun" - Mao
           | 
           | Moreover, Mao is responsible for the Great Leap Backwards.
           | 
           | Winnie the Pooh simply continues the imbecilic behavior.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Posting this sort of hellish flamewar comment to HN will
             | get you banned here, regardless of how right you are or
             | feel you are, and regardless of which country you have a
             | problem with.
             | 
             | If you'd please review
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick
             | to the rules when posting to HN, we'd appreciate it. You
             | broke a ton of them here--seriously not cool.
        
               | sharklazer wrote:
               | Understood. I was going to delete it... then it got
               | flagged. No excuse.
        
             | colinmhayes wrote:
             | Imagine thinking you can arbitrate a different cultures
             | ethical queries. Newsflash, ethics are subjective.
        
           | wolverine876 wrote:
           | > In earlier times the Confucian pacifist ways of China
           | 
           | Imperial China was not pacifist. A basic model of Chinese
           | history, which IIRC came from scholars in imperial China, was
           | that China repeated a three stage cycle (from memory, the
           | terms won't be exactly right): ascension (of a new dyansty)
           | and prosperity -> decline and corruption -> chaos (and war)
           | -> ascenscion ....
           | 
           | China's borders reguarly changed through force. Look up
           | historical maps, for example. However, China had no peers in
           | size and wealth nearby, and therefore didn't fight
           | existential wars.
           | 
           | I'm not sure Confucian philosophy is pacifist, regardless.
           | 
           | > China were not up to the aggression of Western Europe, the
           | US and Japan
           | 
           | They were not up to the technological advantages of the
           | industrial revolution, and took a long time to recognize it
           | and to change. In the early-ish 19th century, the Qing
           | emporer wrote a famous letter to the king of England saying
           | that China did not need their trinkets (industrial revolution
           | technology) that the subordinate king (I forget how that was
           | implied or expressed) offered, apparently not realizing the
           | severe disadvantage. Even after the subsequent brutal,
           | imperialistic attack on China, seizure of ports, and forced
           | trade, the Chinese emporers tried to minimize change, IIRC
           | first trying to just buy military tech without the
           | infrastructure of knowledge, training, skills, etc.
           | 
           | Even today, the CCP seems to think it will have a wealthy
           | capitalist country without a free market (which itself
           | requires freedom and free thinking).
        
           | HillRat wrote:
           | Don't let the propaganda fool you -- like any other empire,
           | China has _never_ been "pacifist," whether we're talking
           | about the PRC that established itself through a long and
           | brutal civil war, or the Qing dynasty and its endless
           | internal and external military conflicts.
           | 
           | The modern mainland state has been very clear -- all the more
           | so since the 3rd and 4th plenums under Xi -- that every
           | aspect of the Chinese sociopolitical superstructure is there
           | to ensure the Party remains paramount. In today's China, Fa
           | Zhi  means not that law rules the Party, but that the Party
           | rules by law.
           | 
           | In their syllogism, any threat to Party leadership is a
           | threat to the Party; any threat to the Party is a threat to
           | its ability to legitimize itself to the people of China; any
           | threat to their legitimation is a threat to the nation.
           | Therefore, any attack on Party leadership or actions is, to
           | them, existential. (I say this the same week the Tiananmen
           | Square "pillar of shame" memorial came down in Hong Kong.)
           | 
           | Thus, the big lie they're promulgating is that Intel et al.
           | are disparaging the nation or government of China, rather
           | than the Communist Party, because the theoretical basis of
           | the state admits no light between them. Anyone doing business
           | on the mainland needs to understand that they will have to
           | subordinate every interest and goal they have to whatever the
           | Party considers important -- hence the "we apologize for
           | pointing out that slave labor is not popular" walkback.
        
           | mrweasel wrote:
           | That makes perfect sense to me. What China fails to
           | understand is that this approach have it's own problem, in
           | respect to their role in the world. It protects China and
           | it's culture, but makes it impossible for western nations to
           | depend on the country.
        
       | joshuajill wrote:
       | Interestingly, small companies like FairPhone work to improve
       | their suppliers' labor conditions.
       | 
       | Intel of all the companies is in a position to do the same or
       | more. However they choose to whitewash their brand by blaming the
       | chinese government of their lack of care. Their hypocrisy
       | backfired, and they let China win on all counts.
       | 
       | Ironically they ended up helping whitewash the chinese
       | government.
        
         | bogwog wrote:
         | How could Intel help improve the forced labor situation in
         | Xinjiang? That's an extremely sensitive political issue which
         | money won't solve.
        
           | foobiekr wrote:
           | Pretty much every problem in China can be solved with the
           | right economic incentives.
        
           | joshuajill wrote:
           | For once they could _try_. They can have rules for their
           | suppliers and factories, and enforce those. Other companies
           | do. Even a tiny company like FairPhone does. But no, they
           | chose for decades the cheap labor, and now they turn around
           | and say  "no more" just to defend their reputation.
           | 
           | In any case, apparently their apologies to China will not
           | stop them from moving away from Xinjiang working, even if
           | just for show.
        
             | xiphias2 wrote:
             | Why do you write ,,even''? You are talking about a product
             | where the main feature is fairness. I'm sure it misses some
             | features that non-fair phones have in return. It's all
             | about what the customer cares about.
        
           | dillondoyle wrote:
           | They could do a better audit of their supply chains. I'm
           | guessing silica is a big thing for them? Excuse my lack of
           | knowledge on raw materials for processors, just jumping to
           | silica = silicon. I do know the region produces a bunch of it
           | used in solar panels.
           | 
           | Intel could also refuse to sell chips to companies that
           | facilitate this genocide - and they are soon going to be
           | forced to more broadly than the current sanctions list.
           | 
           | I don't know if any companies like DJI, surveillance camera
           | companies, etc use intel chips but with the new law just
           | passed companies like Intel will have to do a better job
           | making sure their product does not come from or is used to
           | facilitate uyghur human rights abuses.
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | If every major company benefitting from China got together
           | and made demands I wouldn't be surprised if Chinas hand is
           | forced.
        
             | csense wrote:
             | Any facility or employee on Chinese soil is a potential
             | hostage of the Chinese government. "China's hand is forced"
             | == your factories get nationalized and your employees'
             | families get imprisoned or worse.
        
       | elihu wrote:
       | > "Intel (INTC.O) recently published what it described as an
       | annual letter to suppliers, dated December, that it had been
       | 'required to ensure that its supply chain does not use any labour
       | or source goods or services from the Xinjiang region', following
       | restrictions imposed by 'multiple governments'."
       | 
       | As policies go, that one seems kind of clumsy. Assuming for the
       | sake of argument that Uighurs are being used for forced labor in
       | China (which I'm inclined to believe), then isn't "workers in
       | Xinjiang region are forced labor, workers outside of Xinjiang are
       | not" a bit of an oversimplification? Presumably there is also
       | non-forced labor happening in Xinjiang, and probably some amount
       | of forced labor happening outside Xinjiang.
       | 
       | I suppose sometimes simple heuristics can work well enough to get
       | the job done and more complicated supply chain audits might be
       | too hard. (One obvious alternative is to just stop trading with
       | China at all, but that's a policy that's unlikely to be enacted
       | by the U.S. or other large nations for equally obvious reasons.)
        
         | dash2 wrote:
         | It's not that simple. If you're competing with local forced
         | labour, your own wages will be artificially driven down.
         | Unfairness spreads.
        
           | celeduc wrote:
           | _Slave_ labour.
        
           | elihu wrote:
           | That's a good point.
        
         | ZoomerCretin wrote:
         | > isn't "workers in Xinjiang region are forced labor, workers
         | outside of Xinjiang are not" a bit of an oversimplification?
         | 
         | Not if you knew there was no forced labor in that region at
         | all, and this was all just atrocity propaganda to turn opinion
         | against China. If it's difficult for western corporations to
         | avoid suppliers who depend on suppliers (and so on) who have
         | factories in Xinjiang, then there will be constant stories like
         | this which puts this ridiculous allegation back in the news and
         | social media so we can have our two-minutes hate against the
         | evil empire that's ~~challenging our imperialistic grip on the
         | world~~ ""committing genocide"".
        
       | clavicat wrote:
       | >Intel joined other prominent U.S. companies Monday pledging to
       | do more to address systemic racism in the wake of the killing of
       | an African-American man, George Floyd, by a police officer in
       | Minneapolis.
       | 
       | >"Black lives matter. Period," CEO Bob Swan wrote in a memo to
       | employees Monday, embracing the rallying cry of contemporary
       | civil rights activists. "While racism can look very different
       | around the world, one thing that does not look different is that
       | racism of any kind will not be tolerated here at Intel or in our
       | communities."
       | 
       | lmfao
        
         | inglor_cz wrote:
         | It is the same as when Western branches of various
         | multinational corporations redesign their logos in rainbow
         | colors for the Pride month, but their Middle Eastern branches
         | do not ... offending Islam or the CCP comes with enough
         | downsides to make them think twice.
         | 
         | I think the best default way how to view corporations is
         | "perfectly immoral psychopathic beings always heeding the
         | current Zeitgeist for maximum profit and cheap P.R. points
         | among the class that locally matters".
         | 
         | I am happy to change my mind about some of them if they prove
         | otherwise (e.g. by turning down a massive contract for ethical
         | reasons, or standing up to a Twitter mob sicced on by
         | influential people), but this is my default view in absence of
         | other evidence.
        
           | 5e92cb50239222b wrote:
           | I believe this has happened exactly once, and it's already
           | widely known:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_China#2010-2016:_Giving.
           | ..
        
           | pxmpxm wrote:
           | The worse part, at least to me, is that that these shallow
           | gestures presumably work, that somehow empty posturing on
           | progressive-cause-du-jour actually does buy them goodwill in
           | the western world.
           | 
           | It's either that, or this entire thing as a corporate
           | strategy is run by some HR echo chamber with minimal
           | forethought, and any downside is farmed out to external PR
           | crisis management teams.
           | 
           | I'm starting to think it's the latter, given the amount of
           | backpedalling and policy changes as of late (think google
           | employee walkouts, publishers dealing with wrongthink books,
           | netflix employees trying to scuttle the company's IP etc)
        
             | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
             | What you're seeing is a tiny peak of issues that pop into
             | public consciousness essentially randomly, sometimes
             | because you did a gesture and other times because you
             | didn't do a gesture. Shallow gestures are common because,
             | the vast majority of the time, the only response is some
             | people saying "oh that's nice".
        
         | dang wrote:
         | We've banned this account for repeatedly and egregiously
         | breaking the site guidelines.
         | 
         | If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email
         | hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll
         | follow the rules in the future. They're here:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
        
           | Gupie wrote:
           | What is wrong with clavicat's comment? He is pointing out the
           | hypocrisy of Intel claiming not to tolerate any form of
           | racist. Genocide is by definition racist.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide
        
       | chloerei wrote:
       | As a Chinese, I think the logic of certain Western countries is
       | ridiculous. Because Xinjiang's human rights situation is
       | considered to be problematic, so Xinjiang's companies are banned.
       | As an analogy, can I think that the human rights situation of
       | African Americans is terrible, so I need to ban companies that
       | employ African Americans?
       | 
       | These bans will only make the living conditions of minorities
       | worse, because they may lose their jobs because of the ban.
       | 
       | By the way, Uyghurs live and work in every province in China,
       | especially in the catering industry. I have never heard
       | complaints about forced labor. American propaganda makes me feel
       | ridiculous, but it seems to be working.
        
         | kitsune_ wrote:
         | Is there an equivalent to the NAACP for the Uyghurs in China?
        
         | kwere wrote:
         | the scale is the problem
        
         | jackjeff wrote:
         | The situation of African Americans nowadays is nowhere near
         | comparable.
         | 
         | The issue are the "jail looking" camps which are officially
         | "education centers". Forced labour happens there, which is
         | basically slavery. Western companies don't want to be
         | associated with slavery. It's hard enough when people are paid
         | almost nothing, but here they are literally not paid and
         | obliged to work. The living conditions of people in the camps
         | won't change regardless of what western companies do. Also mass
         | sterilization occurs in these camps which is considered a
         | genocide by many.
         | 
         | I know western media bias is a thing and that most Chinese
         | people have no idea this is happening and are good people. But
         | this is one of these things where there's just way too much
         | smoke for there to be no fire. There are too many testimonies
         | and photos. As uncomfortable as it is, it is unfortunately
         | true. This is not a western conspiracy.
        
         | tgv wrote:
         | You've earned your social credits for today. Pray that they
         | will be of value when someone speaks out against you or your
         | group.
        
         | limoce wrote:
         | There's a huge gap on the opinions of Xinjiang between the
         | Chinese side and the Western side. Don't put your words for
         | Chinese side on HN because no one would vote for you and your
         | comment will be eventually grayed out.
        
           | throw10920 wrote:
           | I can't recall seeing downvoted comments on HN that were
           | defending China while making good points, with sound logic,
           | avoiding whataboutism and crazy comparisons, and being
           | respectful. The problem is that almost every pro-Chinese-
           | policy comment that I've seen here violates one or more of
           | those things.
           | 
           | In the specific case of the GP post, they're making a bad
           | analogy in their first paragraph.
        
         | jfax wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes
        
         | chadcmulligan wrote:
         | > I have never heard complaints about forced labor.
         | 
         | So does this mean they don't exist?
         | 
         | > These bans will only make the living conditions of minorities
         | worse, because they may lose their jobs because of the ban.
         | 
         | but they are slave labour, so whether they have a job or not
         | doesn't really matter? or would you say thats not the case? If
         | so they could move and get a job somewhere else?
        
           | limoce wrote:
           | > So does this mean they don't exist?
           | 
           | Given GP never hears about forced labor, GP may want to
           | express that the percentage of people who are being forced to
           | labor is low, or nearly impossible. "sth doesn't exists" is
           | somewhat extreme.
        
       | jackjeff wrote:
       | They'd better apologize for the apology... or else...
        
       | sys_64738 wrote:
       | Western companies need to stop being pawns for the China
       | Communists.
        
       | mensetmanusman wrote:
       | Wall St. does not care, so these companies can not care. Apple
       | just gave BOE 20% of their OLED business to diversify away from
       | Sanding and LG:
       | 
       | Note that BOE is being propped up by the CCP to the tune of $100M
       | a year in losses over the past decade as economic warfare against
       | SK.
       | 
       | Manufacturing is where today's wars are being fought because
       | these people know it gives them the power over those that would
       | complain otherwise.
       | 
       | I wouldn't be surprised if Intel's supply chain now has
       | components that couldn't be built without a lot of delays if the
       | CCP snapped their fingers (since they have also funded the
       | conglomeration of specialty materials companies: these new
       | companies are cheap when all you have to do is devalue your
       | currency (is. steal a few dollars from all your citizens)).
       | 
       | Hopefully these conflicts stay entirely in the economic and
       | manufacturing realm, because real war is hell.
        
         | ren_engineer wrote:
         | You can't expect an independent company to take on a nation,
         | the US and other Western governments either need to admit they
         | don't care about human rights or commit to flat out banning
         | trade with China
         | 
         | People talk about potential war with China without realizing
         | China has been waging war on the West for decades, China's
         | military doctrine counts economic warfare as equal to
         | kinetic(traditional) warfare. These state backed companies are
         | arms of the military being used to crush foreign nations and
         | Western governments do nothing. Trillions of dollars in damage
         | but they don't care because bombs didn't do the damage and many
         | of the politicians got rich by allowing it to happen
        
           | quacked wrote:
           | Totally agree. In addition, billions of dollars every year
           | are spent on various propaganda wars through advertising
           | firms, political campaigns, and policy groups to convince
           | people that the current state of manufacturing and
           | nationality in the world is both inevitable and desirable.
           | 
           | Forget about the trillions of dollars--the real casualties
           | are social stability, self-sufficiency, and the overall
           | individual strength of the "west". The grandchildren of the
           | people who invented the modern supply chain are wholly
           | incapable of rebuilding it or in most cases even
           | understanding it. How many people involved in the "national
           | discourse" know what a kilowatt is, or have any idea what the
           | country imports and why?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-23 23:01 UTC)