It’s really unfortunate that it is built in an apartheid state.

> It’s really unfortunate that it is built in an apartheid state.

Linear is based in San Francisco. And has offices in New York and Finland. Which one of these is an apartheid state?

You are right. I was confusing it with another company LinearB. I should have double checked.

LinearB is not from "apartheid state" either.

Offices in Tel Aviv including founder from there.

Tel Aviv is in Israel, that is not an "apartheid state", no matter what your favourite brainwash keep telling you.

All of these posts are a replay of what Marx wrote about machinery and alienation from work and intensification of the workday.

This has been used in Gaza to make their own due to Israel’s blockade.

https://logicmag.io/bodies/tarek-loubani-on-3d-printing-in-g...

No need to wonder

ATproturfing is that correct term for it.

(yes very proud of myself for this )

The metaphor I prefer is to be a transparent shit umbrella.

An opaque umbrella doesn't hide the rain, it just keeps it from falling on you.

How many bases does china have around the world? How many does the US?

Imagine if China built one base in Mexico or the Caribbean. People would be treating it like a declaration of war. Meanwhile the US builds a ring of military bases in countries surrounding China and that's not supposed to be seen as bellicose in any way.

> Meanwhile the US builds a ring of military bases in countries surrounding China and that's not supposed to be seen as bellicose in any way.

Shouldn't you take WWII history into the account?

1. South Korea - Korean war happened and majority of South Korean want US military base there 'cause you know North Korea with its nukes point at Seoul.

2. Japan - well, everyone know what happened and the treaty were signed thus military base in Japan.

That's because the US was founded on a unique constitution to empower individuals against tyranny, then defeated (with Russia, mind) the Nazis in world war II, bootstrapped the UN, went to the moon, and ushered in an era of global leadership and peace, along with unmatched soft power (films, news, etc). Camelot, shining city on the hill. China had a bloody communist revolution, then got rich (in part by breaking deals and ripping off IP) - also through hard work. America is porous, "Shortbus", "anyone can make it", American dream. China is ethnonationalist, and has a sense of ethnic and cultural supremacy that is not inclusive of "outsiders". That's why it's a problem, and, rightly, seen/intuitied to be a problem, more so than the US (despite US' many failings/misteps, etc).

History repeating itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

I don’t want my electronics to contribute to genocide and apartheid and possibly the next pager exploding terror attack. No thanks.

Stop using Apple, or Google, or Amazon, or Intel, or Broadcom, or Nvidia then. All have vast hardware development activities in that one country you don't like.

It's not yours, don't have to buy it

I'd be fascinated to know who your "good guys" list is.

Same here. BDS.

How dare you have a moral objection to buying from a state accused of genocide. Please stick to completely organic complaints about comedy festivals and soccer tournaments.

Re: Western. A similar thing plays out when the term "international community" is used in news. It refers to the US and its major allies which means US, Canada, Western Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand more or less.

Essentially countries that were developed prior to 1990 or so , although South Korea is a tricky case today going by this definition, as are Taiwan, Hongkong and Singapore

> A similar thing plays out when the term "international community" is used in news. It refers to the US and its major allies which means US, Canada, Western Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand more or less.

Wait, really? I thought "international community" meant all countries.

There was a particularly memorable use of this sense some time ago, when the UK representative to the UN explained that they abstained from a vote in the General Council that passed with something like 200+ members voting for it because "the international community is still divided on the topic".

That's because you're reasonable.

Sometimes it's used in the expected way, but (more?) often, "international community" euphemistically refers to whomever is currently one of, or an ally of the above mentioned countries.

China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and many many other countries that are very active members of the international community are not counted among members of THE "international community". Hell, much of Europe isn't either, including some of the former colonial empires, on some topics.

China, Russia, India are certainly referred to when using this term. Iran and Saudi Arbia may or may not be. Usually not Pakistan, so I really dont know what in the hell you are saying.