- cross-posted to:
- technews@radiation.party
- cross-posted to:
- technews@radiation.party
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/6745228
TLDR: Apple wants to keep china happy, Stewart was going after china in some way, Apple said don’t, Stewart walked, the show is dead.
Not surprising at all, but sad and shitty and definitely reduces my loyalty to the platform. Hosting Stewart seemed like a real power play from Apple, where conflict like this was inevitable, but they were basically saying, yes we know, but we believe in things and, as a big company with deep pockets that can therefore take risks, to prove it we’re hosting this show.
Changing their minds like this is worse than ever hosting the show in the first place as it shows they probably don’t know what they’re doing or believe in at all, like any big company, and just going for what seems cool, and undermining the very idea of a company like Apple running a streaming platform. I wonder if the Morning Show/Wars people are paying close attention.
You must log in or register to comment.
Bummer. That’s some weak and feckless megacorp bullshit. Just like something Stewart would cover, which is why this show was such a great power move. And yet? Infinite profit over all else, so never mind.
Look at John Oliver, he talks shit about HBO constantly. Do they care? Nope, because he has more Emmys than anyone could know what to do with. Respect your talent and reap the rewards. Pretty basic stuff, Apple.
The difference is HBO is a media company that largely operates in the US, and Jon Oliver making fun of them isn’t going to hurt their business at all. Apple is a hardware company that also makes media. And selling hardware in China is critical to their business. Since the CCP owns China, they can get their panties in a twist and just ban Apple. Like they did with government devices.
As a publicly owned company they have a legal responsibility to maximize profit for shareholders. It’s the same reason why Twitter had to agree to the sale to Elon Musk and why they had to force it. It was a terrible move overall but since Elon was buying all outstanding shares and taking it private, the board literally had no legal choice but to take it since he was offering well over market value.
Public companies don’t get to take moral stands when there’s money on the line. They legally have to put shareholders first.
“Public companies…legally have to put shareholders first.”
I thought this too, but it is apparently a myth.
"There is a common belief that corporate directors have a legal duty to maximize corporate profits and “shareholder value” — even if this means skirting ethical rules, damaging the environment or harming employees. But this belief is utterly false.
To quote the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the recent Hobby Lobby case: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.”
Removed by mod
well-being of the business…ahead of well-being of his employees.
Hey, I mean, like, corporations are people too, man.
So corporations too should have to go to jail if they break the law. Or in this case close down the building and not perform any commercial activity for a certain time
Funny how that worked out huh? All the benefits of personhood, but none of the downsides, like mortality, having to pay fair taxes, incarceration for crimes, possible death penalty for killing citizens …
Still a sticky problem from labor’s perspective, unless the corporate time-out includes salary and healthcare payments. Maybe except the C suite?
But then you might as well keep the company open (Unless it is currently doing harm), and throw the directors in jail.
I always understood stock investing as assuming the risk something like that could happen (I’d a director fucks up, you lose, or vote him out of the job). But now that all of our retirement is tied to the fucking thing it can’t work that way.
Brb gonna go incorporate myself real quick
It’s called incarnation in humans.
Rare supreme Court w I guess? I dunno
Lol try being a CEO and answering to your shareholders about how you’re not trying to maximize profits and growth. Like it may not be legally required but you’re kind of required to just by the nature of the role itself.
Where’d did this “legal responsibility to maximize profit” bullshit come form?
There is no such law, an no entity to enforce the responsibility.
~Court precedent. Shareholders have sued and won for corporations “failing to uphold fiduciary responsibilities” and other similar bullshit. So, now it’s baked into corporate culture.~
Update: See reply below. Courts have upheld that corporations have no requirement to seek profits over all else.
That’s actually not the case.
“courts have consistently refused to hold directors liable for failing to maximise shareholder value”
"In 2014, the United States Supreme Court voiced its position in no uncertain terms. In Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., the Supreme Court stated that “Modern corporate law does not require for profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else”. "
Just more corporate propaganda, that’s all.
https://legislate.ai/blog/does-the-law-require-public-companies-to-maximise-shareholder-value
Holy shit! That’s good to know. Thank you.
The entity is the civil court system, and while there is no law written “no company can work in a way that doesn’t maximize profit”, upon taking investment, it’s typical that companies, the fiduciary, come under the expectation that they’ll be working for the sake of their beneficiary’s interests. In public companies, this interest is clear-cut. Investors want dividends and to see the value of the company increase. This is typically done through maximizing of profits.
So while it’s not explicit that they must forever maximize profits, companies can be successfully sued for not doing so.
Learn more:
Companies have also been sued for not maximizing profits and won the case. “Best interests” can mean a lot of things. It can mean short term profit for one shareholder, long term profit for another, and stable, guaranteed profit for a third.
Then stop calling it a law.
Nobody called it a law. It’s a legal responsibility, and it is law, but it is not “a” law.
Apple is a hardware company that also makes media.
Apple is a lifestyle company. The hardware is just the base layer.
They make some of the best CPUs in the industry nowadays, though.
deleted by creator
Meanwhile every major cloud provider is investing in designing and deploying their own ARM silicon. I’ve benchmarked graviton and T2A, the cost per performance is great and only going to get better.
Performance per watt, my dude. But sure, x86s can still heat your house better than Apple silicon.
Performance per watt is a CPU metric I’ve never seen anyone use before lol
It’s wild what Apple marketing comes up with
Yes, measuring the consumption of electricity for a given performance benchmark is totally irrelevant to datacenter providers, who get their electricity for free from the electricity fairy, and thus can harvest pure profit without operational costs.
It is also totally irrelevant for portable devices, because batteries last forever, and every smart phone has a huge fan inside to dump all the heat waste via dual XTREME exhausts.
It’s wild what Apple marketing comes up with
Performance per watt has always been a major concern of chip manufacturers. Sure, they have increased the amount of watts you can throw at a chip without melting it (8086 used 1-2W) , but the most significant improvements have been towards making less watts give more power.
I can appreciate not liking Apple, there are plenty of valid reasons. This is not one of them. Their CPUs are state of the art and took both Intel and AMD with their pants down.
Nah, Apple is an ad aggregation company same as Google. They use hardware and software to lock users into their products so they can show them ads and collect their data to make the ads more targeted. In return ad companies pay them to serve ads to their users. That’s how they make money.
The fuck you smoking. 80% of sales are hardware and 20% is services, ie music, tv, and their cut of App Store sales
Ad revenue from running ads on the app store, their news app , podcast app, etc.
I didn’t claim they were making most of their money that way, but that’s absolutely the business model they’ve been shifting to for the last decade as their hardware sales decrease pretty much quarterly, especially their phone sales.
It was clarified that Apple devices are fine in government. Teslas ban would be a better example
Apple is pretty reliant on China for other aspects of their business though. HBO doesn’t make phones.
definitely reduces my loyalty to the platform
You are either paying the subscription or not, your inner states mean nothing to them or us.
I can think of an old great daily news show that still doesnt have a permanent host… please!!!..
Or run for president.
I’ve been saying, “Stewart for President” for decades now. He is perfect for the job. He would never want that job, which I just see as further qualification.
He fought congress for two fucking decades for 9/11 first responders and the families to get paid, he comes more than prepared to every talk, and he’s not afraid to shut someone down and call out bullshit.
I’d say he’s over qualified for work in politics
Ukraine got their version of Jon Stewart to become their president and he’s successfully fighting off a Russian invasion. Sounds like an endorsement to me.
Jon Stewart 2024 “It worked for Ukraine”
It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it… anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job
Let’s just kidnap Jon and pressgang him into the Oval Office. He’d be the best president since that peanut farmer, maybe better
Back when he was hosting the Daily Show? Yes. Now? I’ve watched his show a bit and… I think he went a little nuts on that farm of his.
He sounds like vegan Joe Rogan now. Too much conspiracy, too much long anticapitalist ranting while his guests sit awkwardly and say “uh, okay”.
He’s a good guy and what he did for 9/11 first responders was amazing, but he’s not the man he used to be.
Jon Stewart as president might be the greatest thing that could happen in my lifetime.
Well sure, point is producing Stewart’s show was a notable choice that indicated favourable things about the platform/studio.
Yeah you’re either a meal ticket for them or you ain’t.
“Let’s talk about all the cheap Chinese labour that Apple uses despite being the 10th richest company in the world.”
“Let’s not.”
Chinese people deserve jobs too. Comparative advantage is a good thing that helps everyone involved.
The Yuan is currently trading at 7.32 to 1 USD
Companies that appease the CCP are the problem, not companies that leverage exchange rates to better lives globally.
Chinese people deserve good jobs, not jump off of a building to kill yourself, but wait your the 4th person to do that this month so they installed a net jobs.
I am questioning where I supported Chinese government policies here?
Because the initial concern was pay, and that’s due to not understanding economic factors. I don’t support Chinese labor regs at all.
In fact I said
“Companies that appease the CCP are the problem” which I also thought was a nice little pun, given the show being discussed.
I don’t support Chinese labor regs at all.
I wonder why labor is cheaper in China.
Two big reasons
1: currency exchange rates
2: China is sill fundamentally agrarian and industrializing, and many workers are looking for (comparatively) higher pay
How is that a pun?
The show that Stewart walked out on is “The Problem with Jon Stewart”
Chinese people also deserve to not be sent to internment camps.
Yeah totally. Fuck the Chinese government.
Yes, fuck the Chinese government.
And the corporations, both Chinese and American, that help support it.
Depends on what that means imo. Global trade theoretically supports the Chinese government, because money is fungible, but is a net positive all around.
The Chinese will never stop clinging to autocracy without wealth of their own.
The “Chinese” will never have wealth, ask Jack ma.
The ccp would burn China to the ground before releasing an ounce of their power and stolen wealth.
That is not an excuse to stop trying to empower the Chinese to rise against their hellstate.
Capitalism broke the USSR and it will break the CCP.
Boy you sure do sound like you just got your MBA. Chasing the cheapest labor and lowest regulations really doesn’t do much for the populace other than make them slave laborers for better products for the benefits of other nations.
If the wages are the same across multiple industries then it doesn’t really help right? It’s just taking advantage of a poor countryand enriching higher members of that country who actually do see the most profit gained.It might help in getting advanced manufacturing set up in the country but that actually also hurts countries that rely on advanced manufacturing to keep GDP high when they are creating their competitors while doing little investment into themselves.
So yes it works to get the cheapest product possible but it’s really not the super helpful beneficial concept that you think it is and the whole world is not richer for these jobs we give to them to enrich further a group that just chases the quickest profit.
Chasing the cheapest labor and lowest regulations
It demonstrably improves their personal wealth, incentives inclusive institutions, and changes countries. History is most assuredly not on your side here.
Nativism is a plague and populism is the cancer nativism spawns.
What a strange take when a mountain of evidence is right in front of you. China went from “nothing but cheap labor” to the next world superpower because of exactly this kind of exchange. They have modern cities with rapid transit, EVs, and a top tier domestic tech industry.
Well yeah I mean I kinda covered that. They now have advanced tooling and active investments into their infrastructure and country. It’s not yet actually reaching the majority of China and there is still wide issues with these investments. But now companies will have to find the new cheap labor if there is increasing access to jobs that are to pay enough for the citizens to access these higher standards.
A country can’t be cheap labor and an important market without either massive divide in the populace or slave labor.
And if they can’t get cheap labor there anymore these companies will leave and create rust belts like there are in the US. At which point the advanced manufacturing arm and service economy could take over if it’s built enough but they join into a already crowded space with dwindling access to resources. Not to say things haven’t gotten better in sense of moving forward technologically and amenities wise but that is basically always a guarantee of time passing. But this hunt for cheap goods for top level enrichment is not a wholly good venture and is quite destructive in ways that take little effort to see.
Why, specifically, do you hate the global poor?
Wow what a terrible response meant to cause an inflammatory response instead of having a discussion about a topic on an intellectual level. You have set up a pin with an impossible answer and claimed that you are the only right response to knock it down.
But, I have an answer. I care about their well being and not their economic status. I don’t care if they are making more money or not and they aren’t from my country. My countries laws will have no direct impact on them and while I care about the ecology of the planet I can’t be reasonably expected to care about everyone.
You falsely assume globalist ideals are the only right way to live and I would rather care for those immediately around me who have an impact on my life.
We can aim for bettering of societies that aren’t our own without it being based entirely around taking advantage of their cheap labor and unawareness of their lacking systems.
You speak as an economist who only thinks in terms of money without any real compassion and assumes money is compassion.But, I have an answer. I care about their well being and not their economic status. I don’t care if they are making more money or not
These two things are incompatible
You falsely assume globalist ideals are the only right way to live and I would rather care for those immediately around me who have an impact on my life.
And this is evil
Companies that appease the CCP are the problem, not companies that leverage exchange rates to better lives globally.
Companies in China ARE the CCP. Nothing is actually privately owned. Everything is owned by the government, so giving any money to a company in China is supporting the CCP.
Lots of foreign companies have branches in China, including most global corps
True, but that is completely irrelevant to the topic of whether it is ethical to use cheap Chinese labor. Those branches are not the ones employing cheap labor from the blue collar workers in China. Those are almost entirely white collar jobs, and many of them are in place specifically to work with the local companies who DO employ the blue collar laborers. The sweatshops aren’t OWNED by Nike or Gucci or Apple. They are contract facilities owned by a CCP-backed corporation.
Sure but that level of contracting is not contributing to the CCP so much as to the Chinese people
It’s ethical to employ any sort of labor
It’s ethical to employ any sort of labor
did this mfer just imply slavery is ethical
Slavery isn’t employment
the condition of having paid work. “a fall in the numbers in full-time employment”
The Yuan is currently trading at 7.32 to 1 USD
Ok?
Let this be the regular reminder that any time that a gigantic for profit corporation seems to be doing the right thing it’s a mere coincidence and they are following their bottom line. The moment those two depart, they will look after their bottom line right thing be damned. There are no moral corporations.
Maybe those good things they do while are convenient to them are moral and bring real benefits and can be followed and celebrated, but ultimately they are a convenient mask to trick customers. So don’t ever be loyal to a brand, be loyal to principles.
But I thought Apple was the good guy, looking out for us folk and doing privacy-focused things!
What? That’s just marketing garbage? Nah, surely Apple wouldn’t just be a shitty company just like everyone else. Better buy some more overpriced products to support them!
The privacy thing was always hiding the real truth. Apple will never be able to compete with Google on ads or tracking: they have neither the engineering chops nor the reach. By being “privacy first”, it saves Apple money and cuts off a little of Google’s revenue stream.
The benefit to customers was a secondary effect.
Apple’s stance is more effectively like “Let’s get to know each other in private, babe” than “privacy first”.
Has anyone ever really believed that? It became very apparent very quickly that their MO was getting customers to buy only Apple products and then to replace them as often as they could get away with.
I dunno the state of stuff now, but my MacBook Pro is from 2011 and I still use it (with some upgrades)
And my phone is five years old, on its original battery, and is still faster than most of my friends’ phones lawl
People love to hate on Apple products, but they are great, IMO.
If you work in audio, media, want to come across as fancy or want something with a dash of Linux functionality then a Mac is a good option. Otherwise, stick with a PC or a Linux compy.
Good for web and mobile dev too tbh
Good for backend dev too tbh.
I hated them when I was a teen, but I suppose that was PowerBook era. I got older and realized that I only hated them because they couldn’t play games and were expensive.
Bought my first MacBook (ironically for playing games on the go—PC laptops were shit back in 2007) and after an unfortunate soft drink accident had it replaced in 2011 (for free woooo!) That’s the one I’m still using today.
I don’t use any Google products or services so my only choice is an iPhone, and I fucking love it. Each iPhone I’ve had lasted more than four years, while still running great. That’s more than I can say about my HTC Dream lawl, but that was first-Gen so I give it some leeway.
Still a PC builder all the way, have four of them. But people shitting on Apple for their products’ longevity are silly. The cost is high (usually) but they’ve got some quality shit that lasts.
My pc has lasted 14 years (and I expect another 40) and been capable of playing every game in that time because I’ve been able to upgrade it without dropping thousands at once.
Apple products are good for sure, but they don’t let the consumer choose very much. Sometimes that’s good (I always advocated apple products for my grandparents) but more often than not it’s just annoying.
I buy a new android phone every 3ish years and give my old one to my mum, she’s never had one break yet so all mine have had at least 5-6 years life before she upgrades to my latest old one (and possibly it still has years left). I don’t buy the idea that Apple phones last longer than Android at all.
What upgrades? Not doubting you, just curious what you’ve been able to do.
That was kinda the point I was making because apple don’t really let you upgrade hardware so if you want an improved computer better go spend a couple grand on our shiny new one with a 0.2mm thinner screen!
They definitely make good products, and I advised my grandparents to stick to apple because it’s more intuitive for a non techy person, and because they’re all identical and customer support would be easier to deal with.
Phones matter a bit less I suppose because we’re not all upgrading hardware in android phones, they did recently lose a court case for deliberately throttling speeds on old devices though didn’t they?
16GB RAM and replaced the optical drive with a SSD!
Damn that’s a real shame, no surprise Jon walked out. That man actually has standards, he don’t need the money he was there because he cared and wanted to put out a positive voice that analyzed the bullshit we all have to deal with and his platform enabled that perfectly, just like his work for vets and burn pits.
I hope he transitions elsewhere but keeps the content as-is
don’t forget his battle with Congress to fund the 9-11 Emergency Responders
Because we all know how easy it is to silence Jon Stewart.
Something tells me he could get more funding for a show with a gofundme than Apple+ is authorized to spend.
There is something particularly amusing and very ironic that a mega-corp like Apple, the most valuable company in the world, is standing up to defend a communist dictatorship and won’t accept any dissent.
Jack Ma approves of their decision.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, ahead of its decision to end The Problem, Apple approached Stewart directly and expressed its need for the host and his team to be “aligned” with the company’s views on topics discussed. Rather than falling in line when Apple threatened to cancel the show, Stewart reportedly decided to walk.
Good for Jon Stewart. He held the line even when the money people demanded that he compromise. Maybe a VP pic. I could see it.
He is successful enough, old enough and made enough money, that he can just retire. Threatening him is an empty threat. He is 60 and probably given his long career earned more than he can spend in rest of his life, unless he goes super yacht and private jet crazy.
The whole show was a come back from retirement essentially. A voluntary indulgence on his part. Surely lucrative indulgence, but indulgence still. Apple needed him, he didn’t need Apple.
Most of the crew probably will leave for other project with a letter of recommendation from John in their pocket.
We are in a dystopian future, where cooperate interests trump reporting.
Independence or the free media does not exist anymore, they are all governed by the economic interests of the 1%. Democracy is hereby dead, and nobody is fighting to save it anymore.
Democracy offically died in America the day Citizens United was approved by the Supreme Court.
Nice post.
Apple tv sucks anyway. I’d like to remind people that it’s near the end of the mls season and they still have no android mobile app. They actively piss on anyone not totally in line with their ecosystem, etc.
deleted by creator
For what it’s worth, they do have an Android TV app.
Which makes the lack of an android app all the more shitty. They have one already but refuse to make it available if the device isn’t connected to a TV.
Then you get into the actual layout of the program. Spoilers are a huge issue. I can’t watch a game later without having the game ruined partially. Sure you can switch off scores, but you still have to scroll through game highlights to get to the full match replay.
Looks like I’m going to continue not watching Apple TV for the foreseeable future.
I have many subscriptions that I pay for, netflix (for now), HBO, prime… but Apple is not one of them. I just Sail the seas when I want to watch Severance lol
Severance is one of the most original shows I have ever seen. The torrent must flow
Ahoy, matey
deleted by creator
another reminder that apple’s “privacy, that’s iPhone” is a marketing gimmick. they profit from surveillance and censorship in China1. elsewhere, this catchphrase has allowed them to suck Facebook’s as revenue into their growing ad business, surpassing even tiktok in terms of ad revenue2.
they’ll happily do pink washing, but will try everything do dilute labour rights3.
so, apple is just your average big tech. nothing exceptional about them(except for them suing regular people to oblivion4).
in case of hitting a paywall, either disable JavaScript, or use bypass paywalls clean.
1: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-censorship-data.html
2: https://finshots.in/archive/apple-is-an-advertising-giant-almost/
3: a simple search result would lead you to many such cases: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=apple+labour+rights&ia=web
4: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/11/technology/apple-trademarks.htmlThey were so close to implementing on-device scanning last year it’s scary. The number of people who supported it because Apple promised to only use it for child sexual exploitation material really shocked me. “Think of the children” really does have a way of making people’s brains short circuit.
It was a lot longer ago, like 2.5 to 3 years ago, but that’s pedantic.
My own father was shocked that they’d do that (his death is how I know the timeline; no sympathy required, I’ve dealt with it, it happens). He really respected them, primarily through my respect of them and excitedness about their tech. He was blown away that they’d even consider such a thing. He just couldn’t calculate how such a misstep could happen. I can, but what a mistake that was.
I’ve seen an argument that this could have been a calculated risk to prevent attacks when they enabled increased encryption. I don’t think it was that, even if that was the resulting effect. They are too protective of their brand to deliberately take a hit.
Changing their minds…shows they probably don’t know what they’re doing or believe in at all
undermining the very idea of a company like Apple running a streaming platform
I’m not sure in what way it was suggested that Apple was “different”, but to clarify, companies don’t do things for “ideas” they do things for profit. If it increases that profit, they “believe” in it, and if it doesn’t, they’ll kick it to the curb.
And not only is Apple no different than any other company in that respect, they are pretty much the top-tier example of it. They’re a $2 trillion company, the biggest in the world. They didn’t get to that point focusing on the greater good. Nothing is more important to them than their profit.
I hope he moves to a different platform, one that’s not so beholden to the Chinese audience.
HBO already has John Oliver. Put the Jon Stewart show back to back with him.
