Laws are not automatically just and corporations are not people; but thanks for the false equivalence.
If in the pursuit of profit I aid the ruling class in injustices, then I’m an accomplice to those injustices. And yes, that applies in my home country as well as any other. The realities of market economics means sometimes standing by ethical principles comes at the cost of profits. Corporate boards beholden to shareholders and investors lack the latitude to spend those profits on principle because their money is by definition other people’s.
Laws are not automatically just and corporations are not people;
You think that merely pointing out these superfluous distinctions gives you the right to determine which laws other people/companies in other countries must/must not respect? What exactly is it that you think gives you this lofty power over the wellbeing of others?
but thanks for the false equivalence.
The false equivalence is you thinking that your opinion gives you the right to tell others that they should break the law in China. Is it ALL companies that have a presence in China that need to break their laws or do you have, as I suspect a special case for Apple? Do you want to go to China and tell them that they aren’t ethical and that everyone should use your moral yardstick to determine what is/isn’t ethical? Please do, but don’t sit back in your comfy armchair and telle others that they should break laws that will put them in prison or out of business just so you can be satisfied.
Take a chill pill, buddy. It’s an opinion about corporate ethics, not a policy initiative. But yeah, I’m going to vote with my wallet and my actual franchise to demand American corporations aren’t a party to unethical laws anywhere on Earth because I think human rights should transcend borders. You got a problem with that, then blow your top at someone else, because I’m not impressed.
Maybe try decaf?
Anyway, you’re clearly upset, so I think this is a good point of departure for us. I wish you well, but we’re done here.
Apple’s vaunted “protection of civil liberties” is an advertising campaign. Perhaps some people buy product because they find the advertising convincing, but I don’t see any way to prove that Apple doesn’t have backdoors in their products for every single law enforcement agency in the world.
If we assume the FBI is even minimally competent at their job, it will be in their best interests to make very loud noises about how impossible it is for them to crack whatever hardware they would prefer criminals to use.
I think most people buy the products they want or need, and then some will retrofit their view on Apple security according to their desire to feel good about their purchases. Security is not assured by appeal to authority or by favorable media coverage, so 99% of people making judgements on Apple’s security are demonstrably unqualified to evaluate it.
Total silence on what you think gives you the right to consider yourself a sufficient moral authority that you can tell others to break laws. Yup you’re the typical example of one who tells others to do what he is too afraid to do himself. Vote with your wallet, sure for what it’s worth, but keep your unfounded moral judgements to yourself when it involves sacrifices you are unwilling to make yourself, Mr HolierThanThou.
For the record, I don’t drink coffee or tea. I suppose you were once again staring into the mirror and seeing what you wish you were able to do yourself?
Thanks for trying, but that sea lion wants to argue with their strawmen instead of anything I actually said. As expected, they got their last word in on the other argument they’re having in their imagination. Obtuse to the end. ¯(°_°)/¯
I’ve told them we’re done, so any further attempts by them to address me will simply be flagged. The mods are pretty good about dealing with sea lions.
