So because technology hasn't yet pervaded the undeleloped world Apple can't be "advancing humanity"? It seems that by your reasoning, "humanity" cannot "advance" until every person on earth has basic services... Do I have that right?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tim Cook Expresses Thoughts on Equality in Auburn University Award Speech
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So because technology hasn't yet pervaded the undeleloped world Apple can't be "advancing humanity"? It seems that by your reasoning, "humanity" cannot "advance" until every person on earth has basic services... Do I have that right?
Bigotry card being played. Please. There are millions of Americans and LEGAL immigrants out of work. Those that hire illegals would bring back slavery if they could,
Companies like facebook, HP, etc that are clamoring for more tech visas are doing so because they can fire them at will without unemployment or any paperwork. Zuckerberg, Gates, et al can go F themselves
Which can backfire with anyone that disagrees with their views. Cook should shut up and build products.
Gates is promoting Monsanto GMOs throughout the world (he also owns at least 500,000 shares of their stock) and will do more damage than any good he supposedly is doing. Millions will get degenerative diseases and cancer thanks to him. Obama is doing his best to poison this country, Gates is finishing the job.
Don't give me nightmares. Hillary, like Obama, is another Monsanto whore and corrupt to her core
See above, Gates is pond scum
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/
Tons of info on this site, a google search will come up with even more.
GMOs first approved under Clinton in 1996 without any long term safety studies. Cancer and degenerative disease rate has skyrocketed since then.
GMOs contain foreign DNA implanted into the seed which shows up in the grown plant.
Many countries have banned GMOs, even China rejected a shipment of corn from the U. S. because it contained GMO DNA. China! Yes, the country of melamine poisoning rejects our food supply.
Obama has placed Monsanto hacks in charge of the USDA and FDA-more GMOs approved under him than any other President, this after promising to label GMOs when he first ran for President.
I asked for a scientific source. Your link is far from a scientific source.
Below is a quote with links to scientific information...
Source
It's a very valid point, but it's also a very difficult chicken-and-egg problem; China gets so much investment from high-tech companies because they have an incredible manufacturing infrastructure now, something nowhere else in the world can match. Labor isn't even all that cheap, which is why really cheap stuff that relies less on manufacturing technology and more on labor (clothing, tools) is now manufactured mostly in India, Bangladesh and the like.
There's also the fact that a lot of African countries are landlocked, which makes bulk shipping from a factory more expensive.
The LED lamps I mentioned being sold widely in Africa are, in fact, manufactured almost exclusively in China. It would be very nice to see them manufactured locally, but I'm only aware of one company attempting to do that, and it's an uphill battle due to the lack of manufacturing infrastructure.
China, as you say, is mostly focusing on resource extraction rather than infrastructure construction (unlike Foxconn's construction of actual factories in the Americas), but the real solution would be to have someone, somehow, work out a way to start building up the infrastructure to take advantage of the available labor pool in Africa. It's not an easy problem to solve, and optimistically will take decades, but it could happen.
Apple's employees look very equal... as long as the people who actually make their stuff aren't employees.
OrganicConsumers.org is probably the worst source of information I can think of, no offense. It's a lobbyist group or at the very least a highly biased website.
Last edited:
No we don't all agree that he was an ***hole. Sure, he could've been an ***hole sometimes, to some people, but maybe they deserved it. Maybe they didn't. Maybe we've all done things in our lives that we regret, but just because we've done some of those things doesn't make us ***holes. He didn't live in his own world, but even if he did, so what? And what if he did only care about himself? On what grounds is he required to care about anything else but his own rational self-interest? He cared about his own interests, and he enriched more lives than almost anyone else who has ever lived. So what if he was a jerk to people who said stupid things to him?
So what if Tim "actually cares about people?" This does not make anyone's life better. Sure, he can use his platform at Apple to entourage employers not to discriminate, and that is exactly all he should be able to do. Enacting legislation to "end discrimination" is inherently discriminatory. Sure some minorities get an opportunity they otherwise wouldn't have had, but what about the person who was denied that opportunity because of what color they were? We see that even now with colleges accepting applicants who aren't quite as good as others just because they're in some minority group, because if they don't accept them, then they'll be sued for discrimination. What about the kid who was denied a spot at that college because of that? How might a government go about fairly implementing a bill against discrimination?
What's important is that computers hold a very important part of the future. It's not a toy. It makes you more powerful and productive.
I'm not saying that Steve Jobs had to care about others. But if you read his bio and listen to what his past friends and colleagues said about him realize that he lived in his own world and really didn't give a **** about anyone/anything else besides the company. Was he successful? Yes! Was he a good CEO? Yes! Is it a bad thing that Apple now has a CEO who cares more about others? NO! That's all I'm trying to say.
----------
If you look carefully, Cook's not really supporting a certain political agenda on purpose. He's advocating for freedom of expression and non-discrimination. That these ideas are attached to a certain political party is not his fault.
Jobs as founder of Apple, CEO of Next, Pixar and Apple, was important. Jobs as a human being was entirely unimportant. Millions and millions have benefitted from what he did professionally. The number of people with valid complaints about him as a person is tiny. If you go to your nearest supermarket, chances are you'll find a manager who has shouted at more employees than Jobs did in his life. Now if you count the people who would say "all in all, I would have been better off if I never had met Jobs", I think that number is probably zero.
A few comments:
1) Love to know how much Tim dropped Auburn's way for this award. No University in their right mind gives away awards like this for free.
2) Somewhere a handful of his classmates and faculty that treated him like crap while he was in college is a) drinking a lot, b) threw something at their monitor, c) been trying to get in touch with their "old friend" for a long time (Apple has placing unwanted solicitations into voice mail purgatory down to and art) or d) all of the above.
3) I'm sure the talk in the University President's office was much more interesting than this talk.
1) Love to know how much Tim dropped Auburn's way for this award. No University in their right mind gives away awards like this for free.
2) Somewhere a handful of his classmates and faculty that treated him like crap while he was in college is a) drinking a lot, b) threw something at their monitor, c) been trying to get in touch with their "old friend" for a long time (Apple has placing unwanted solicitations into voice mail purgatory down to and art) or d) all of the above.
3) I'm sure the talk in the University President's office was much more interesting than this talk.
You're right, it is very biased.
Biased towards making our food supply safe and lobbys for food safety not profit.
I'd say it's better than getting all the info from Monsanto, Monsanto lobbyists or people and politicians they've bribed.
Seriously, check the links they provide-there is a ton of info on there.
Note what I mentioned below. There is some tie in with smartphones where care otherwise wouldn't be readily available. They are able to use remote labs to process the data.
The list is missing this one.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22553730
Eh, I would disagree only because I wouldn't say that he didn't give a **** about anyone else. I just think that he structured a company, and built products that embodied who he was as a person, and he therefore cared more about the success of his company than he did about spending a lot of time with others he cared about, or being nice to people who were coming up with crap ideas, or poorly executing their tasks at the company, i.e. MobileMe.
It's amazing the amount of ignorance and hatred that can spew simply because a tech CEO talks about human equality. Lol, all I can do is laugh, it keeps me sane.
Even if it's all JUST talk, it's still more than you're doing. Probably because you don't care about the topic much and don't really care about much of the world beyond your personal bubble. But don't slander a man who does get out there and talk about it. If you don't think he's backing it up enough with actions (even though none of us know what he does with his personal life/money), then go ahead and do more yourself. That was the point of the speech, to inspire action, wasn't it?
Even if it's all JUST talk, it's still more than you're doing. Probably because you don't care about the topic much and don't really care about much of the world beyond your personal bubble. But don't slander a man who does get out there and talk about it. If you don't think he's backing it up enough with actions (even though none of us know what he does with his personal life/money), then go ahead and do more yourself. That was the point of the speech, to inspire action, wasn't it?
Yup, and contributed to the biggest information flow that has bypassed tyrannical rule since the Delian League.
If we had the Internet fifty years ago, LBJ would have been lucky to last six months as President after the JFK assassination.